Cornerstone At The Park

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, which was registered in February 2023. This key question has been rated outstanding. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently better than expected compared to similar services. People’s feedback described it as exceptional and distinctive.

This service scored 88 (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 always made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by thoroughly assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

People’s needs were thoroughly assessed prior to them moving to the service. People, and relatives and professionals, where appropriate, were always involved in these assessments. Assessments made sure people’s historical experiences and their wishes for the future were known and understood. This meant people experienced a holistic approach to their care needs. For example, people’s personal histories were used to consider their environment, which staff became their key worker, and set small achievable goals with a view to growing their confidence and supporting their independence. For one person, this meant regular contact with their relative and testing and adapting their support needs in incremental steps.

The service considered people’s mental and physical health needs when assessing their support needs. People were always shown around the service before they moved in. This meant people and the service could feel confident their needs would be met. Regular reviews took place, which always involved people, and others where appropriate. A person told us, “They talk to me about my care plan once every two months. I can say if I want it changed.”

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.

Assessments of people’s needs and risks were supported by best practice guidance. For example, people had detailed positive behaviour plans, which were closely monitored and reviewed when required. People also had plans to direct staff about what to do should people relapse. These identified both the person’s responsibilities during these times or crisis and those of staff. For example, they contained information about the signs to look for, and what people wished staff to do and how they wanted staff to behave and react.

People’s nutritional needs were met and people were supported to choose healthy options where appropriate. People were encouraged to support the chef with meal preparation and menus were set each week according to people’s preferences. People were free to choose their own drinks and snacks where they wished.

One person had been advised by health professionals to trial a gluten-free diet and the service were supporting this person with this.

The provider always worked well across teams and services to support people. They shared thorough assessments of people’s needs when they moved between different services, so people only needed to tell their story once.

Staff facilitated flexible care for people by working with a number of services, appropriate to individual needs. The service held monthly behavioural meetings with a provider-commissioned external clinical psychologist and the provider’s clinical lead. This meeting was additional to meetings with other named professionals supporting people’s care. One person explained how the service had supported them to navigate the health system. This meant one ongoing health issue was better managed and had given the person greater independence in their daily life. The registered manager explained these discussions provided an additional layer of support for people living at the service and contributed to discussions with external organisations, particularly when seeking additional funding or support for people to enhance their lives. Staff collaborated with professionals to ensure they were regularly involved in people’s care. Visiting professionals spoke highly of the service and reported effective communication from staff. One professional told us, “I rely on their judgement. I know when they ask for an assessment they will have done the work.”

The provider always supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to fully 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 health professionals when needed. One person told us, “I had a touch of flu, I was really off that day, I couldn’t eat and they [staff] were there for me.” Staff advocated for people to make sure they received the health support they required. For example, one person required additional physical support and staff diligently ensured this was pursued with health professionals. The service had successfully advocated for one person to receive health support which had initially been refused. This meant that person was supported towards a better quality of life.

Staff were vigilant about monitoring people’s health and encouraging people to seek support when needed. On the day we inspected a 5-a-side football tournament was taking place between different services within the provider’s remit as a way for people to keep fit and broaden their social network. People who had opted not to take part in the tournament were kept regularly informed of their peer’s progress throughout the day; there was a sense of healthy competition and generated much excitement and discussion.

The provider was exploring social prescribing with GPs for 1 person living at the service to better support their health needs. This meant this person would have access to additional support, outside the service, in preparation for them possibly leaving the service to live more independently. A professional told us, “Staff at Cornerstone are responsive and active in coordinating medical care for [people] when it is required. They provide a supportive environment for people and will assist when required or requested by [them] during appointments.”

One person received specialised, highly complex treatment across the country. Staff ensured all aspects required to support this treatment were met. For example, they arranged appropriate transport, supported them to attend the treatment, and worked closely with the specialist team to ensure the person followed their guidance and staff understood how to monitor the person for any adverse effects and what to do should these occur. Staff advocated for the person throughout this treatment and with local health practitioners on their return.

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.

Staff constantly monitored people’s care needs against the support they received. People were involved and relatives and professionals, where required. This meant people always received the right level of care and support. Quality audits ensured managers took a holistic approach to improving outcomes for everyone at living at Cornerstone.

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

People were supported and encouraged to understand their human rights. Where people did not have capacity, this was recorded. Staff understood when people may or may not have capacity for specific decision making and worked to ensure people were able to make decisions where they were able and provided appropriate support and best interest decision making at times when they were not.