Accede Support

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.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated 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.

Assessments of people’s care were undertaken when they first began using Accede Support and people were involved with these if they were able to. Care plans were formulated using a variety of methods, such as meeting with people's social workers, obtaining health history, and care records. People's likes, dislikes and choices were clearly documented throughout their support plan in line with their assessed needs. This detail enabled staff to know all about the person, their background, current needs and interests. One relative said, “The manager and the social worker came out to do an assessment and they asked lots of questions about how to support [person].” This meant the registered manager could be sure they could meet the needs of the individual before providing support. In addition, the assessment process meant staff had some understanding of people's needs before they started using the service. Where new people were being supported, meetings were held with staff, to provide guidance and communicate people's needs and preferences.

People’s sensory needs were considered as part of the assessment process. They recognised the importance of different senses and made sure staff were aware of people’s individual sensory 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 undertook a range of training to help deliver evidence-based care. Staff told us training was helpful. Staff regularly met with the registered manager to discuss their work and best practice.

Staff followed and applied their learning in line with professional guidance, such as the following the principles of positive behaviour support. The manager was up to date with best practice guidelines for supporting people with learning disabilities and autism.

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.

The manager and staff worked well with health and social care professionals. There were various professional involved with the service such as speech and language therapists, occupational therapists and learning disability nurses.

People’s physical and emotional needs were well documented and clear records of professional input and outcomes were recorded. Staff told us they worked closely with each other and the registered manager. They took part in face to face and telephone meetings. They shared written information about people’s care. Staff reported any concerns to the registered manager and told us these were acted on.

The management team and staff demonstrated how they responded when a person's anxiety levels increased due to triggers in the community. They promptly engaged with several services to explore ways of reducing the person’s anxieties and increasing their ability to cope with change. For example, staff worked with a specialist OT to develop and implement a daily visual schedule, providing structure and reassurance. This structured routine and predictability have given the person more choice and control, making it easier for them to adapt to new situations.

The service welcomed the involvement of advocates. Advocacy is a process of supporting and enabling people to express their views and concerns, access information and services, defend and promote their rights and responsibilities and explore choices and options.

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 access a range of external health care professionals to improve their well-being. This included, psychologists, psychiatrists, speech and language therapist, epilepsy nurses learning disability and intensive support teams.

People had hospital passports in place which provided an overview of their health requirements and could be used when admitted to hospital.

Staff supported people to eat a balanced diet to maintain their health.

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

The outcomes for people using the service truly reflected the principles and values of 'Right support, right care, right culture' in the promotion of choice, control, independence and inclusion. People and their families were seen as the experts in their life with a focus on what they can do first, and any help they needed second. Staff had taken great care to ensure peoples voices and choices were heard and to enable people to build and stay in control of their own lives.

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

The registered provider, the registered manager and staff were passionate about supporting people in the least restrictive way and always considered and acted in people's best interests. The service was skilled in how it obtained people's consent for care and treatment, adapting their approach to suit individuals needs and involving them in related decisions and assessing capacity when needed.

Records showed us where assessments demonstrated a person was unable to make a specific decision capacity assessments were completed and best interest decisions had been made with the involvement of the person, family and appropriate health or care professionals. Examples included administering medicine and personal care.