Tony Long 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 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’s needs were assessed prior to moving into the service, to ensure the service was the right place for the person to live in and for others already using the service. Care plans were detailed and captured people’s information. Assessments of people’s needs continued after people moved into the service and re-assessments were completed where needed.

Staff told us they received good information about people when they started living in the service and when people’s needs changed, they were informed.

People were complimentary about how the initial assessments took place to ensure the service had the required information.

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 told us they had fed back on improvements to the food being offered. Previously the service did not cook meals on site which people said impacted their wellbeing. One relative told us, “The food is so much better. There was a time [Person] didn’t like the food and wasn’t eating. They have a cooked meal now and have a roast on a Sunday. The new manager has taken things on board.” The new registered manager had taken on this feedback, and all meals were now prepared on site, which gave people the opportunity to be more involved in preparing and eating the food they liked.

Staff were aware of people who were at risk of malnutrition and dehydration, and this information was recorded in people’s care plans.

The provider had systems in place to ensure leaders and staff were kept up to date with good practice and any changes to legislation.

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.

Staff provided positive comments about how the teams work together. One commented, “All staff team are good and supportive.” Where staff had raised concerns with leaders, they felt this had been dealt with appropriately and in a timely manner.

One professional working with the service told us, “My visit outcomes are cascaded to other staff members, so all are aware of the plan and management.”

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 and relatives told us they felt people were supported to live healthy lives and had access to food, snacks and drinks. We observed there were opportunities for physical exercises during activities. Music sessions were offered weekly, which people said they enjoyed. We also saw evidence of a person who was supported to access a local community initiative to achieve a healthier weight.

A professional told us staff had recently supported them with ensuring people had access to vaccinations. They told us, “Staff were excellent support in the way to approach who likes a plaster, who has allergies or if anyone had a previous reaction. It was clear how well they know their residents. It was also nice to see and hear them giving the resident choices such as in what room they wanted to have the vaccine, which arm, did they want a plaster etc. I was also told if anyone had allergies or was unwell on the day.”

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’s care plans had information where areas needed to be monitored. For example, we observed 1 person’s care plan where it highlighted that fluid needed to be encouraged due to ongoing urinary tract infections and another medical condition. We saw daily notes reflected this need was being recorded and monitored.This meant the risks of infections were reduced for the person.

One professional told us, “One resident is high risk of infections, and the staff escalate concerns which is key in avoiding sepsis. Staff are helpful when we are looking at preventative and monitoring plans.”

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

People told us they were asked for their consent so they could make active choices in the care being provided. We observed staff and leaders constantly offering people choices and asking for consent on how they would like things to happen.

People had been assessed to establish whether they had capacity or not in specific decision making. Information was clearly recorded and documented.

Staff had received training on consent and the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and were knowledgeable about how to apply the training in practice.