Kingswood 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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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. Improvements had been made to people’s plans of care. Regular review meetings were held for people and their relatives and information from these meetings was used effectively to update people’s plans of care. Records evidenced that the information in care plans was being utilised effectively by staff and there was some evidence of improved outcomes for individuals. Records were organised and contained appropriate assessments. Plans were in place to adopt an improved initial assessment for people interested in coming to the service.

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. Staff worked in line with agreed plans of care and there was evidence of improved outcomes for people. For example, instances of restraint within the service had reduced significantly and records evidenced that staff had worked with people to support their development of communicative skills. Where people faced challenges, records evidenced that the service had worked proactively to engage with correct services to support decisions about people’s care and treatment.

The provider mostly 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. Positive changes had been implemented at the service to ensure a better consistency of staff for people living at the service. This had helped to improve communication within the service and information sharing with professionals. However, some work was still required to ensure information was consistently shared as some feedback to inspectors highlighted some issues still persisted in this area. The management team was aware of issues and had identified and addressed where this had occurred.

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. People’s health needs were assessed and recording in their care plans. Staff supported people to attend appointments where required and referrals were made appropriately to health and social care service.

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. Records evidenced improved outcomes for people at the service. For example, one person had been supported to develop their communication skills which had supported them to have improved psychological well-being.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People had appropriate assessments in place to support their decision making and required consent to care and treatment was considered in line with people’s best interests.