High Healthcare

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 did not always make sure people’s care and treatment were effective because they did not always check and discuss people’s health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them .
Assessments were robust and completed in a timely manner. Visit-by-visit plans provided clear guidance for staff, and people and their relatives confirmed care needs were consistently met, and they were involved in planning updates.
People and relatives also confirmed they were fully involved in the planning and reviewing of their care. One person told us, “The registered manager set up my initial care package before they passed this onto my carers who provide the right support. My plan of care and my needs are reviewed regularly.”
However, formal care plans were not always in place for staff to follow. While this did not compromise safe or person-centred care, the absence of standardized care plans limited the service’s ability to consistently demonstrate comprehensive, individualised care planning in written records.
 

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 and their relatives told us they felt staff were knowledgeable and skilled and provided safe care and treatment tailored to individual needs. Records showed people were supported to have enough food and drink, in line with their preferences.
Staff followed assessments and risk assessments for skin integrity and other relevant areas, ensuring people’s clinical and care needs were consistently met.
 

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.
Care staff meetings were held regularly, and minutes were clear in showing the sharing of knowledge, good practice, and embedding of consistent care standards. Staff reported communication within the service was effective and described working well as a team.
Records and observations showed effective partnership working between the staff team and other professionals, including district nurse hub teams, members of the local authority quality team, GPs, and occupational therapists. Collaboration supported coordinated care and ensured people’s needs were consistently met.
 

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.
Staff supported people socially, helping them to stay connected and safely access the community. This support encouraged social integration and contributed positively to people’s wellbeing and quality of life.
Daily care records were clear in showing how staff met people’s preferences for food and drink, while also promoting a balanced lifestyle with adequate hydration. Staff supported people to be as independent as possible and encouraged participation in tasks of daily living, helping people maintain skills and engagement in everyday activities.
 

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 regularly monitored wounds and worked closely with district nurses, occupational therapists, GPs, and other professionals when additional support was required. Collaboration ensured people received the right care to achieve positive outcomes.
People reported feeling supported to take part in tasks and to build their independence, demonstrating how care promoted both wellbeing and skill development. One relative told us, “[Person] has always been independent, and the carers acknowledge this and encourage [person] where possible. [Person] has choices and decisions to make where appropriate without compromising their safety.”
 

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.
Consents were gained during pre-assessment processes before care packages commenced and were continued to be sought at care plan reviews and by care staff before any cares were provided each day. The people whose care records were reviewed had capacity and were not subject to restrictive practices, so no records were required to accompany decision making on their behalf.
Staff were able to describe when and why they obtained consent, and records showed all staff had completed training on the Mental Capacity Act. This approach ensured people’s choices were respected and supported the delivery of care in line with their preferences and legal requirements.