North Short Term and Urgent Support Team

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 75 (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.

People had person specific plans of care. People were actively consulted and involved in the creation of their care plans. These identified the support people required as well as the goals they had to in place to assist them reach their independence. One person told us, “Whilst I was in hospital, they came to the house to discuss things with my partner which helped me a lot as I got to know what was being provided and what I could expect.” Care plans and people’s progress was reviewed on a weekly basis to ensure support was tailored to meet the person’s improving levels of independence.

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.

People received support which was in line with current best practices. There was a joined-up approach between the service and involved health staff. This ensured support was provided in a collaborative way, which focused on what was important to the person and how they could reach their goals.

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.

People benefitted from an approach which was joined up with health and social care organisations. Following the completion of the initial assessment, this document was kept up to date and shared with other services, so people only needed to tell their story once. Due to the multi-disciplinary weekly review meetings, all staff and health professionals involved were aware of the changes and improvements a person was making.

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 achieved their goals and returned to being able to live independently. There was a high success rate of people being supported by staff to regain lost skills and return to be independent following a hospital stay or period of poor health. One member of staff told us, “Most of the people I visit are independent by the end of their time with our service. It is really rewarding to see and be involved with their recovery.” Staff and leaders worked hard to make sure ensure people reached their goals and desired outcomes.

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.

Staff and leaders closely monitored people’s support needs. There was a weekly meeting which involved various health professionals and together they monitored people’s improvements and checked whether any changes to their care plan was needed. People’s care plans were kept up to date and there was a clear record updating any changes and this was shared with health staff with the persons permission.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

People were consulted on decisions about their care. There was a clear audit trail and records of the consent people gave to receive support from the service. There was a consideration to people’s ability to consent to the care and if any mental illness would impact their capacity to make decisions. Advocates, friends and relatives were involved and consulted, with the permission of the person, about the support people may need. Where people lacked capacity to consent, relatives were involved in ‘best interests’ decision around the support they needed.