Highfield House

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. People had their needs assessed and plans put in place to meet them. Relatives told us they were involved in supporting staff with assessments, reviews and developing care plans. A relative told us, “We do go to meetings, and they do ask our opinion and what we want. They also keep us informed, the staff are amazing there I have my trust in them.” Staff told us they had all the information they needed to enable them to support people effectively. The manager told us they were currently transitioning to a new assessment and care planning process, and some plans had yet to transition to the new system. Records we saw were comprehensive and all aspects of people’s lives were considered. Regular reviews were also noted.

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. For example, people had individual risk assessments and care plans in place that used evidence-based tools to share guidance with staff on keeping people safe. Everyone had a health action plan in place which staff used to ensure people had access to health care services and maintained their health and wellbeing.

The providers systems to ensure the staff team worked together were not consistently used. Staff had a system in place where they had to complete a written handover at the end of every shift. We saw there were gaps in these records as staff had not completed the handover as required on all occasions. This meant we could not be sure staff were being kept up to date on the care people had received. Where other agencies were involved in peoples care this was documented in peoples care records and the advice was followed by staff.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. People had their health needs considered and were supported to maintain a healthy lifestyle. Relatives told us they were involved if people needed engagement with different health professionals. A relative told us, “I get phone calls if anything has to be done or if [person’s name] has been seen by a health professional or anyone.” Staff understood people’s health needs and could describe the support people needed with this. Care plans gave guidance for staff on how to manage specific health conditions and there were specific plans in place to ensure people maintained their health and wellbeing.

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. People had regular reviews undertaken of different aspects of their care when their needs changed and routinely once a month. People and their relatives were involved in these reviews, and they were designed to improve outcomes for people over time. Relatives told us reviews were consistently completed when things changed. A relative said, “I am going to a meeting soon to review the emergency care plan due to recent medical problems.” Staff were also involved in reviews and helped to plan how to support people to achieve positive outcomes. Outcomes were described in people’s care plans and quality of life was considered. For example, we saw a care plan which referenced increased contact with a family member as a chosen outcome.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People were supported to give consent where they were able, and decisions were taken in peoples best interest when they could not consent. Relatives raised no concerns about how staff supported people with decision making. Staff had all received training in the Mental Capacity Act and could describe how they supported people in line with this. The manager told us individual mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions were in place and recorded where people could not consent to their care and support, records we saw supported this.