CSL Alford

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 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. People were involved in these assessments and supported to take part. Staff listened to people and helped them feel confident that their needs were understood.

Communication needs were checked and met, which helped improve care and treatment. Staff used different tools to assess people’s needs and made sure the information was clear and up to date. This helped staff give the right support and achieve the best outcomes.

Care needs were reviewed regularly to make sure they stayed relevant.

The provider worked with people to plan and deliver their care and treatment. People were involved in making decisions about what was important to them, and their views were respected. This helped people receive safe and effective care that met their needs. The provider showed they understood what mattered to people. Staff delivered evidence-based practice but were not always aware of the current best practice guidelines that supported the way care was given. However, this gap in knowledge did not negatively impact the quality of care provided to people.

The provider worked well with different teams and services to support people. They shared people’s assessments when they moved between services, so people only had to tell their story once. This helped make sure care was joined up and smooth. Professionals we spoke with said they were happy with the quality of care. They told us teams worked well together and always focused on getting the best outcomes for people. Staff made sure that people’s needs were understood and met. This helped people feel supported and safe during changes in their care.

The provider helped people to manage their health and wel-lbeing so they could stay independent and have more choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, helped reduce their future need for care and support.

People were encouraged to make healthy choices. One person told us, “[Staff] encourage me to eat healthily, they chop up fruit for me.” This showed that staff understood people’s needs and preferences and gave support in a kind and practical way.

Staff worked with people to help them stay well, both physically and emotionally. They helped people take part in health checks and supported them to understand their own health. People were involved in reviewing their health and well-being needs when needed.

The service focused on spotting risks early and helping people to prevent their health from getting worse. One person had worked hard with staff support to greatly improve their dental health. They told us at appointments such as the dentist, the staff support them to travel to the venue, but they then told the staff if they wanted them to come inside or not. Staff worked together with people and other professionals to make sure care and support were well coordinated.

The provider regularly checked people’s care and treatment to try and make it better over time. Staff were committed to improving care and making sure people had good experiences. However, the service did not always clearly record outcomes. This meant they could not effectively review what was working well or what needed to change. Without this information, it was hard to understand how people felt about their care or whether it met clinical standards and personal goals. As a result, the provider could not fully show that care was improving or that people were getting the best possible outcomes. The provider had plans in place to improve record keeping but these were not yet implemented.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when giving person-centred care and treatment. Staff conducted mental capacity assessments in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. However, these were not recorded in ways that demonstrated the person’s involvement or how they were supported to understand the decision being discussed. Staff understood the importance of checking with people to make sure they were happy with the care being provided and supported people’s choices. People were encouraged to say who they wanted to deliver their care, and this was respected in practice. There was no formal care agreement in place to clearly explain people had the right to change who delivered their care or how people could use it. This meant people might not have fully understood they had this choice. The provider was working on a new care agreement to make this clearer and to help promote meaningful consent to care. This showed a positive step towards improving how people were informed and involved in decisions about their care.