MSA Supported Living 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 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.

There were robust systems and processes in place to support the assessment of people's needs. Care planning documentation was accurate and there was evidence of people being involved in the planning of their care.

The provider did not always plan and deliver people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did not always do this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

There were robust processes to support evidence-based care within the service as use of relevant tools such as weight charts. Care plans included relevant information on people's nutritional needs. However, documentation regarding what food people had eaten was limited, which failed to provide effective oversight of nutritional need. For example, where people may be losing weight. Following feedback, the provider implemented actions with staff to ensure appropriate recording for food and drink is in place.

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.

There were systems in place to support staff to work well together in the service. Staff completed handovers which shared relevant information for people. Professionals spoke highly of staff in the service. One professional told us, "I have no concerns about the service, staff, management and have had a very successful outcome for the [person]. I was introduced to them, and [person] has also had a positive experience." Staff spoke positively about how well their teams work together. One staff member told us, "The organisation promotes a positive working environment."

The provider did supported people to manage their health and wellbeing, so people could always maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives, or where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

The provider supported people to live healthier lives by supporting them to attend medical appointments and had been able to identify associated health risks and escalate accordingly. For example, to the GP practice.

The provider did not always routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They did not always ensure that outcomes were positive and

consistent, or that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

The provider did not always have robust documentation to effectively monitor and improve outcomes, for example, in people’s daily notes. Care records did not always document people's care interventions, for example, support with personal care or meals. Appropriate tools were used to support with monitoring, for example, behavioural charts, however, these were not fully utilised to provide a full overview of people's behaviours to determine how the team could work together more effectively to deliver effective care. The provider had been responsive to our feedback and was taking action to develop more robust systems.

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

There was appropriate consent documentation in place, including in an accessible format. People told us consent was sought before care interventions took place.