Deway Care Limited

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 67 (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.

The care coordinator completed the initial assessment of people’s needs. This included a review of the referral to ensure they could meet the person’s needs, a phone call with the family and then a visit to the person.

People’s care was reviewed annually, or if their needs 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.

People’s care plans included details about support with food and drink. This included whether people were able to eat independently and any special diets or allergies were documented. A staff member told us, “[Some people] have diabetes so we do not give them sweet things; no sugar in their tea.”

The provider did not always work well across teams and services to support people.

Most people and relatives described issues with communication with the office team. A person said, “There is no point in speaking with them as staff change all the time, they used to phone from the office last year not now they don’t phone.” A relative said, “I don’t feel confident with the office they used to come out and see you but now just do it over the phone it’s like ticking the boxes.”

Staff we spoke with confirmed they felt supported by managers and described positive relationships with colleagues. A staff member said, “We work as a team.”

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.

The registered manager told us people tended to have a lot of support from families so there was less need for the service to get involved in referrals to other services. We saw evidence of this in people’s records. For example, a staff member had documented they informed a relative when a person complained of soreness and the relative had already arranged for a district nurse to visit.

The provider’s monitoring of people’s care and treatment for improvement was not always effective. A manager said, “We speak to the staff, we audit to see if there are any changes in needs.” They also told us they issued emails every month for feedback.

People and relatives confirmed they were approached for feedback but felt this was not always effective. A relative said, “I’m always on the phone to the office and they are charming, but I do feel let down as things don’t seem to change.” However, we were also told by a relative, “We get a text message about feedback from the office each month…and the office will adjust visiting times to help with hospital visits.”

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

People’s care records confirmed whether they had capacity to consent to care.

Staff understood consent was needed before providing care. A staff member said, “We take permission before we apply cream. We don’t do anything; we seek consent first.”