Yanah Care

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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.

Since our last assessment the provider had made improvements to their care planning process. Care records were now more detailed and contained information about people’s health conditions that could affect their day to do health. This also included mental health conditions and learning disabilities.

Where conditions were identified, care plans and risk assessments were now in place that provided staff with sufficient information and guidance to provide effective care. This included detailed care and support plans for people with a learning disability and for people under 18. People and relatives / carers were fully involved with this process

The provider was in the process of transferring all paper-based care records to an electronic system. This system enabled staff to have instant access to updated records, ensuring people received the care and support they needed. We viewed both paper and electronic records. We found most care plans were detailed and individualised. Where we found a small number of records that required more detail, the provider acted promptly and made these changes.

People told us they received the care they needed so there was no impact on people’s health, safety and wellbeing.

Staff told us they had sufficient information to provide people with the care they needed.

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.

Some people required support from staff to manage health conditions such as diabetes and diet. Relevant guidance was in place to guide staff. For example, we saw evidence based, best practice guidance for staff to follow for a person who had diabetes. The guidance provided information on how to support the person should their blood sugar levels rise too high or drop too low.

Staff kept records on how they had supported people and when. This included regular repositioning for people who were cared for in bed or whether people required food and drink to help them gain or lose weight. The provider regularly reviewed these records.

The management team 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.

Guidance received from health and social care professionals such as GPs and pharmacists was used to update care plans and risk assessments. This ensured people received the most relevant and up to date care for their needs.

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 staff understood their needs and provided them with the care and support they needed. One person said, “I am diabetic, so carers are aware of my breakfast needs, I have hot cereal, with sweetener, toast and tea.” A relative said, “A month ago [family member] fell on the floor and forgot to press their alarm. The carer found them on the floor. They did all the right things and phoned me. They acted appropriately.”

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to improve it. They ensured that outcomes were consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

People's needs were assessed, and care and support was delivered in line with current standards. This included people’s mobility, ability to make their own meals and get dressed and to be able to reposition themselves to prevent pressure sores. Where concerns were identified these were acted on by referrals to health and social care professionals and/or agreed changes to people’s care and support requirements.

A relative commented on the input of staff in monitoring their relative’s health conditions. They said, “Staff take a lot of care and notice of their skin as they are in bed a lot. Staff would say if the district nurse needed to visit and we also have support from the GP, Occupational Therapist and nurses.”

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

People were supported to make choices about their day and night routines, with these preferences clearly recorded in their care plans. One person said, “Staff ask me what I want to wear, they go above and beyond, even ordering my food over the phone from the supermarket, they are very kind.”

Care and support records contained examples of people agreeing to and signing their care records. Others, including parents and carers for those under 18 had been consulted before care provisions were agreed.

We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA, whether appropriate legal authorisations were in place when needed to deprive a person of their liberty, and whether any conditions relating to those authorisations were being met. We found the service was working within the principles of the MCA and if needed, appropriate legal authorisations were in place to deprive a person of their liberty.