Acorn Lodge - Surbiton

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 newly registered 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 made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. People were involved in their care plan review meetings and had their views implemented as part of the day-to-day support. People had a nominated staff member for on-going support with planning their care. A person commented, “We talk to our key worker about what’s been happening.”

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. People were provided with opportunities to express their food choices and had their preferred meals offered to them daily. At lunch time a person told us, “I don’t much like steak and kidney pie, so I will probably have a pasty.” People had food available throughout the day and they chose what time and where to have their meals.

The provider worked well with family members to ensure effective care delivery for people. People had their families involved where they wished to do so. Family members’ views were sought to inform the care planning and delivery which helped the service to support people’s best interests. This included the service working together with a family to motivate and encourage their relative’s socialisation. A family member told us, “We are often consulted by staff if any concerns or we are worried about something.”

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 told us they would tell staff if they were not feeling well, commenting “[Staff] can telephone the doctor if needed.” Hospital passports were in place to inform healthcare professionals about people’s health and care needs should they urgently need to go to a hospital.

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 the expectations of people themselves. People received support to discuss their short and long-term goals and the outcomes they wanted to achieve. This was in relation to people’s interests, activities and travelling.

The provider did not always tell people about their rights around consent and did not always respect their rights when delivering care and treatment. The management team told us that people had support from an independent mental capacity advocate and healthcare professionals where they required help to make a complex decision. However, people were not always involved in the process of making the decision as legally required by the Mental Capacity Act (2005). We found that due to oversight and a single time, a mental capacity assessment, followed by the best interests decision as necessary, was not undertaken to determine a person’s choices in relation to the risks they were willing to take because of their health condition. Arrangements for the assessment were made immediately after our visit making sure the person was not unlawfully restricted in the service’s care.