Pockets of Peace Care Ltd

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. Assessments were completed prior to the commencement of support, with the information gathered informing the development of care plans. Care records were person-centred, clearly reflecting individuals’ preferences, needs, and how they wished to be supported. Staff had access to these records and demonstrated a good understanding of the people they supported, indicating familiarity with their needs and routines. This helped to ensure care remained responsive, relevant, and reflective of any changes in needs or preferences over time. Relatives told us they were actively involved in the assessment process and in the ongoing review of their care. A relative told us when asked if they were involved, “Yes. I took the lead on care planning so that they knew everything about [person].”

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. The registered manager demonstrated a good understanding and application of current good practice to assess and acted on people’s needs. Care plans gave staff up to date information to meet people’s needs. At the time of the inspection, meals and snacks were prepared by family members. Should additional support with nutrition and hydration be required, further detail including individual preferences would need to be included into the care plan to guide staff. Staff received regular supervision and training to support them in delivering care in line with good practice guidelines and standards. While some additional training was needed in some areas, there were clear plans in place to address this. Families of people involved in the service told us they were involved in discussions about their care ensuring their views and preferences were considered. One relative told us, “They listen to us when we explain needs, likes and preferences.”

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. Records showed positive working relationships with professionals involved in the service. A relative commented, “They work with the social worker, and it runs smoothly.” Staff spoke positively about management and their colleagues and described working collaboratively and effectively as a team. One staff member told us, “The working environment has been positive, uplifting and supportive and everyone tries to help one another.”

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. Information in care plans provided guidance for staff on how to monitor and care for people to keep them safe and well. Where health information and contact details were kept separately to the care plan, we asked the registered manager to ensure staff always had access to this. We found evidence of engagement with professionals, which was recorded in care records and other documentation. Where health concerns were identified, staff took appropriate action, responding promptly and ensuring follow-up.

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. Care records were reviewed on a regular basis and updated to ensure they accurately reflected people’s changing needs, professional advice, and revised outcomes. Where additional support was identified the registered manager liaised with professionals to secure appropriate support. One relative told us, “The manager applied to the council [local authority] to get funding for 2 staff members for our child which was really good.”

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. However, further training on consent was required to ensure it fully reflects the needs of all age groups supported by the provider. Information about consent, including how individuals communicate it, was documented in care records and communication plans. However, some records needed more detailed guidance to help staff recognise when a person is not consenting to support. Where restrictive practices are used, there should be a clear, formal record of professional and parental involvement in the best interest decision-making process. This should also outline the alternative options that were considered and ruled out, to demonstrate that the chosen approach is the least restrictive option. The registered manager responded promptly by arranging training, updating care records, policies, and templates, and engaging with relevant professionals to ensure their formal involvement in best interest decision-making. These revised systems were still to be shared with the staff team and needed embedding into practice.