Executive Connect 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 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.

We saw evidence of thorough assessments completed alongside people and their families, which were reviewed on a regular basis. Assessments were holistic and took account of all aspects of people’s health, wellbeing and communication. Assessments were uploaded to an electronic system so that staff could access them easily on their mobile telephones. People and families could access these also which they found useful. Staff documented care notes which the manager monitored remotely. The manager completed care plan audits to identify gaps and areas for improvement.

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 manager planned care alongside other health and social care professionals so that care took account of all aspects of a person’s health and was in line with current good practice. The provider used recognised tools to assess different aspects of people’s health and wellbeing. Staff could access guidance to make sure care was delivered according to best practice, for example falls prevention awareness.

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.

The service worked with external health services as required including GPs. A health professional said, “It was positive having the support worker, deputy manager and manager at the review meeting.”

Partners fed back that they had good working relationships with staff and managers.

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.

Staff tailored care appropriate to people’s needs and could help people to maintain a healthy diet and nutrition. Staff could support people to engage in interests and hobbies that were important to them and take part in stimulating activities.

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.

Staff knew the people they cared for well; they observed any changes or deterioration to people’s health and escalated these as required.

The manager conducted regular reviews about people's health and care needs. Audits were conducted at the service to drive improvements to people’s care, and ensure they received good outcomes.

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

Staff completed relevant training and understood their responsibilities around mental capacity; they sought consent for all their caring tasks. People’s capacity was assessed and considered in people’s care plans appropriately. The provider was not supporting anyone who was subject to a court of protection order at the time of the inspection.