Carepoint Services Ltd (Prescott 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.This is the first assessment for this unrated 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 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 did not always ensure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.People told us they had meetings with the provider before their care commenced. Leaders told us of their pre-assessment process and how they used the information to create care plans and risk assessments. However, there was no evidence of pre-assessment meetings to ensure a holistic and consistent approach. Care plans did not always contain detailed and personalised information about a person’s likes, dislikes and communication methods or support required. This had not been identified during auditing of care plans. However, where people required monitoring for specific health conditions, the appropriate forms were in place. For example, one person required monitoring for nutritional intake. This had been monitored and advice sought from external professionals. One external professional said, “I have found that the person I reviewed, their care plan and care notes were reflective of their needs.” The provider had a lone working policy.

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 had appropriate policies and procedures in place. For example, food and fluid charts were used to monitor nutrition and dehydration for people who needed this support. Where people were at risk, staff worked with external professionals to ensure good outcomes. One person was at risk of malnutrition and losing weight. Staff had followed care plan guidance and closely monitored the persons nutritional intake and their weight. They shared their concerns with an external professional and additional measures were put in place to support the person. Staff knew people’s preferences, likes and dislikes well.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people.People spoke positively about how staff worked together and with other professionals. Staff worked effectively with partner agencies to ensure people’s needs were met. Professionals told us that staff communicated with them well and alerted them when people’s needs had changed or needed review. One professional said, “I have had meetings with [the registered manager] who shared their concerns and worked in a proactive way to get people the support that they need.” Another added, “I have found that [registered manager] has always asked for help and guidance if they were unsure and has also involved health or other professionals as and when needed.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control.Staff supported people to live healthier lives. For example, one person explained how staff supported them with daily exercise. Another person with a physical disability told us how staff supported them to visit their friend who lived in the building. People had choice with what they wanted to eat. One person told us how staff supported them to cook vegetables to have with a ready meal of their choice. The registered manager said, “We try to get people in for activities such as ‘Chairobics’. If the weather is nice, we encourage them to go in the garden. We try to get people involved in activities such as bingo. We bought bigger playing cards for one person so they can be more involved.”

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 were given opportunities to give feedback about their care. People had care plans in their homes. Information on specific health conditions and risks was reviewed and updated when needed. For example, leaders spoke about the changing needs of one person and how they were working with external professionals to get specialised equipment and support in place. They told us the actions they had taken, and how they would prepare and train staff to perform these specialised tasks. Spot checks were caried out on staff to ensure they were adhering to best practice.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.People told us staff asked them for consent before commencing care. One person said, “They ask me if I would like to do something and they don't take it for granted.” Staff had training in mental capacity. Leaders carried out competencies of staff to check their knowledge. Staff were aware of the importance of consent and supporting people to make decisions. One staff said, “I always respect them, their choice and what they like. I ask them how they would like to do something. I give them time to make a decision. I want to make them happy, so I do my best to help them.” Leaders told us everyone had capacity to consent to their care. Where people were unable to sign their care records, verbal consent had been documented.