Wisdom Support Services 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.

At our last inspection we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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 sought to ensure people’s care and treatment were effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing, and communication needs. Assessments of people’s needs were completed prior to them joining the service to enable the provider to determine whether their needs could be met safely and effectively.

The provider identified outcomes during the assessment process and these were used to develop individual care plans. These plans outlined people’s care and support needs, as well as the outcomes they wished to achieve, and provided guidance for staff on how best to support them. People and their relatives were supported to take an active role in planning and reviewing their care needs. Assessments and care plans were generally comprehensive and included information about people’s specific needs.

The assessment process supported the development of person-centred care plans. These included 1-page pictorial summaries with topics such as “How you can help me”, “How you can communicate with me”, “Things I like and don’t like”, and “People who are important to me”.

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.

Person-centred care plans were developed including what was important and mattered to each person. This includes a one-page summary of topics such as ‘What I am like’, ‘How you can help me’ and ‘People who matter to me.’ This informed staff of personalised and individual information about people and ensured effective ongoing care.

Staff provided evidence-based care. They undertook a range of training, including specialist training about supporting people with a learning disability, communication and how to respond to challenging situations.

Staff worked collaboratively with each other to support people with their needs. Information in relation to people’s needs and any changes with their care were shared through daily handovers with staff.

Staff worked effectively with health and social care professionals to ensure people received appropriate support when meeting their physical and mental health needs. These included GP’s and mental health teams. Staff we spoke with said, “We have good staff; we work well as a team and communicate well” and “Staff work well together, direct line managers are good.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing. 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 care plans documented how best people should be supported.

Staff monitored people’s conditions and acted if people became unwell. We saw staff made timely referrals when people required medical healthcare and treatment and when staff needed advice and information for changes in people’s conditions. However, we did identify that people were not always allowed autonomy and choice around food.

People were supported to access healthcare services when required. The registered manager worked in partnership with external professionals, including GPs, mental health teams, and local authorities, to support people’s health and wellbeing and to help ensure continuity of care.

However, the provider was not always able to demonstrate that people’s care and treatment were routinely monitored and reviewed to support ongoing improvement. For example, outcomes from appointments with mental health services or social workers were not consistently obtained or recorded within people’s care records. The registered manager told us, that restrictions around food included social worker input, however, there were not records in people’s care files to evidence this.

Records showed that people had identified goals, aspirations, and desired outcomes, and that people and, their families were involved in developing and reviewing these.

However, due to our observations during the onsite visit in relation to poor restrictive practice in relation to food, we could not be assured restrictions were being applied appropriately to ensure people's rights and dignity were always protected and there had been consideration of less restrictive alternatives.

Staff did not demonstrate that one of the principles of person-centred care was to offer people choices and act on their wishes.

Relatives told us and we observed staff being respectful and sought people’s consent before supporting them.