The Willow

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.

People had pre-admission assessments completed before moving into the home. People told us they were offered the chance to visit the service and spend time there to support transitioning from home. One relative told us, “[relative] came for a respite break in July, [they] settled so well [they] stayed". The registered manager told us they complete the care plan and continue to add to it as a person settled into the home. People and their representatives were involved in reviews of care plans.

Management communicated well with staff when there were changes in people’s needs. We observed handover meetings taking place between shift changes and any concerns in people’s care were highlighted. We observed staff completed care tasks appropriately.

Staff were able to tell us what peoples’ current needs were and recorded communication with healthcare providers discussing changes in people’s medical needs was present. However, not all care plans reflected current needs or care tasks to be carried out. We provided feedback to the provider regarding this.

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.

People always had access to food and drink. People were able to eat when they wanted and were actively encouraged to eat together at mealtimes. People were able to eat in their room if they chose to do so. Care plans reflected people’s preferences for consistency of foods and whether they needed support to eat. The service had a chef who prepared breakfast according to what people wanted on the day. People told us there was “lovely food, it’s always hot and I have choices” and “food is delicious”. The provider used skin integrity tools to assess risks and guide staff as to how to apply topical creams.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. The provider made sure they shared an assessment of people’s needs when people moved between different services.

Staff, worked well with external community professionals to effectively deliver co-ordinated, timely, consistent, person-centred care. Plans for transition and referrals to health services considered people’s individual needs, ongoing care arrangements, and expected outcomes.

Partners told us they were confident information given to the service was shared and utilised to ensure continuity of care. Partners told us information was promptly shared with peoples’ representatives or families. Partners told us when they visited people at the service, staff “stay with [person] to help with essential medical information I need about their [needs]”.

People had hospital passports which gave a brief description of people’s life history, care needs and plans for the future. Partners provided positive feedback to the service regarding this. This meant people only needed to tell their story once.

Staff told us “I think we’re all a good team actually, everybody works well together, usually you can tell how a colleague is feeling. I think people are really professional when it comes to looking after the residents. You help each other out if you can”.

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

The provider advocated strongly for residents and ensured reasonable adjustments were in place to enable people to access healthcare services. Staff and volunteers provided physical armchair exercise sessions to people. We observed staff encouraging people to mobilise independently, and make healthier choices in their lifestyle, physical and oral hygiene. People were offered choices around how their personal care was carried out, including whether they would like a wash, bath, or shower. Where people were at risk of deterioration in their hygiene, health and skin integrity, staff worked collaboratively with them to ensure they were given individualised support at a time that suited them.

We saw evidence the management team made referrals to appropriate health services quickly and acted swiftly on their recommendations. Partners told us they were confident that staff knew people very well. We observed management advocating for people who faced difficulty in obtaining pressure relieving equipment. This meant people were able to have their skin integrity maintained and be free of discomfort.

Care plans include peoples’ preferences in how they would like to be supported, and their level of independence. People were regularly supported to visit the dentist and had access to community health services within The Willow.

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.

People’s health and wellbeing was routinely monitored. Some people had been identified to be at risk of losing weight. Staff monitored food and fluid intake for these people and recorded this daily. People were supported to maintain their level of mobility, and gain access to social opportunities. Relatives told us their loved one had “regained a lot of [their] self-confidence” and independently accessed the community. This meant that people were able to achieve positive outcomes and regain some independence.

The provider always carefully explained to people what their rights around consent were, made sure they fully understood them and always fully respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

We observed staff and management always asking for consent when entering people’s bedrooms or providing care and medication. People were supported to make their own decisions about their care. The service told us about people’s capacity and how they were able to refuse or give consent for specific decisions. Where people lacked capacity, assessments had been completed with people’s representatives and healthcare professionals and best interest decisions made, however, these were not documented clearly and did not provide clarity as to whether a person had capacity. We gave feedback to the provider about this.