Central 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. This is the first inspection for this 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 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 care plans identified their needs and described how care should be delivered to meet identified needs.

People had an initial assessment before they started using the service. Assessments were carried out to determine if the service was suitable for them and had the capacity to meet their needs.Managers completed in‑depth assessments of people before their care package started, often the same day or the next day, reflecting a commitment to responsiveness. Assessments covered mobility, diabetes, pressure areas, home environment, adaptive equipment, safety, and support needs. They helped provide staff with the information and guidance they needed about people to deliver safe and responsive care.

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's care plans detailed the care they needed based on their identified needs. The provider worked with local social care professionals to ensure support was provided in line with assessed needs.People received effective care in line with what mattered to them that followed best practice guidance. Staff were trained, competent and used evidence‑based approaches.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once. There was a collaborative approach to planning and coordinating people’s care and treatment. Staff worked well together to deliver coordinated care. Communication within the team was effective which supported continuity of people’s care. A relative said they saw the “same cluster of carers” and were satisfied with the service.

Staff told us the service communicated well. Managers and staff regularly shared updates about people’s wellbeing and changes in need with each other. Staff understood the importance of teamwork during double‑up visits and followed procedures for safe hoisting of people. One staff member said, “If we are running late, we contact each other.”

The service coordinated with professionals when needed, including GPs, social workers and occupational therapists. Staff could explain how they escalated concerns, contacted emergency services and involved managers. Staff knew whom to contact for advice about people’s health and support needs, such as the person’s GP.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Records showed staff supported people to maintain their health, wellbeing, nutrition and independence. People received help with meal preparation and hydration. Staff described supporting people with breakfast, hot meals, drinks and prompting hydration, which was important during warm weather. Staff said they encouraged people to remain active, including walking or going outside where possible.

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. Relatives felt the service helped their family members in their day to day lives. A person said, “The carers look confident when tackling a job and seem well trained.”

People were supported to maintain their care routines and maximise their health, independence and wellbeing. Staff told us they monitored people’s health to ensure they received positive outcomes and a good quality of life. A relative said, “The personality of the carers means they are on very good terms with us. They are light hearted and warm. They respond to us very effectively especially as we are starting to struggle.”

The provider informed people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Staff told us they asked for people's consent at all times before providing them with support. People’s capacity to make decisions about their care was assessed. Staff were knowledgeable of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). They described clear consent processes, such as knocking on people’s doors, explaining tasks, giving people time and space, and encouraging choice.

A staff member said, “I understand people’s capacity and what it means for them to decide what they want.” People’s choices and decisions were respected. Relatives told us their family members were asked for their consent by staff in relation to the care and support they received. They were involved in planning their care. People and their relatives were involved in care decisions and staff respected their wishes. A person confirmed, “I have a care plan that was updated just yesterday. It was done together with another member of staff.”