SeeAbility - The Willows

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Relatives told us they were regularly involved in reviews of their family members support and were informed of any changes. One relative told us, “They involve me in everything. They always get in touch if there’s been an appointment or if they know I’m due to go, they will tell me when I’m there.”

Systems were in place to assess people’s needs. Information gathered was used to develop detail support plans which highlighted the support people needed, what was important to them, dislikes, health needs and communication plans. Support plans were regularly reviewed to support people in setting goals, understanding any changes to their wishes and monitoring support required with health care needs.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

Staff worked alongside health and social care partners to ensure referrals for support were made in a timely manner and guidance provided was incorporated into people’s day to day support. For example, where guidance had been provided from professionals regarding the support people required when eating and how their food should be prepared, this guidance was closely adhered to by staff. Staff had received training in preparing food appropriately and individual guidance was easily accessible for staff to refer to.

Staff on the whole demonstrated an understanding of best practice guidance including Right Support, Right Care, Right Culture. In addition to providing training relating to this, the provider had designed audit systems in line the guidance to monitor the care and support people received. Alongside this the registered managers drive to develop increased opportunities for people, had led to improvements in people’s quality of life.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

Systems were in place to support staff communication and any changes to people’s needs or routines. Regular handover meetings took place to enable staff to share information. Handover information entered onto the electronic recording system ensured staff had read and acknowledged any important messages.

We observed staff communicated well with each other and planned what was happening with people, so everyone was aware. Staff told us the registered manager had supported the team to develop positive working relationships which had in turn ensured they were able to provide more consistent support to people. One staff member told us, “(Registered manager) has really supported us in changing things. We all work really well as a team now and the staff all appreciate each other.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

People were supported to have a healthy and balanced diet, whilst taking into account their personal preferences. Different menus were in place to account for people’s differing needs such as intolerances and those who required foods of a modified consistency. Staff were also aware of people’s likes and dislikes and adjusted the menu accordingly.

In addition, people were supported to take regular exercise to help them maintain good health and mobility. These included people taking part in swimming, cycling and walking. A staff member told us one person enjoyed taking short walks throughout the day and we observed this happened throughout our visits.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

The support people received was regularly monitored and reviewed each month with their keyworker. This was an opportunity to review what people had enjoyed, what hadn’t gone well, any changes to their support needs and plans going forward. People were supported to set goals as part of these processes. Whilst in some instances goals and people’s wishes took some time to plan, it was clear these were based on personalised information from the person, their relatives and the observations of the staff team. People’s right to have as ordinary a life as possible was clearly considered when developing goals with emphasis being placed on using local amenities and supporting one person to cast their vote in a recent election.

There were occasions when people’s rights were not always fully respected when delivering their support. During our visits we observed occasions where staff did not always gain people’s consent or inform them what was happening next. Examples included staff placing clothes protectors on people at mealtimes without gaining their consent and asking people to stand and walk with them without giving an explanation as to where they were going. We discussed these instances with the management team who assured us they would address and monitor these concerns going forward.

In other instances, we observed staff gain people’s consent prior to providing their care and staff were able to explain the importance of this. For example, staff checked with people before entering their rooms to review medicines. When one person said they would like to accompany staff in completing the checks, the staff member ensured they were involved in the process.

People’s capacity to make decisions in relation to their care needs was assessed in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Capacity assessment relating to specific decisions were completed as required. Where people were found to lack capacity, best interest decisions were recorded detailing the rationale behind decisions made and following discussions with those who knew the person best.