GoodOaks Homecare - Horsham and Crawley

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 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’s needs were thoroughly assessed before their package of care commenced. The registered manager or members of the office team visited people either in their own homes, hospital or care home to undertake face to face assessment. Initial assessment forms were comprehensive and included people’s health needs, preferences on how to be supported and any associated risks with health complications or their environment. A person commented on the assessment process and said, “[Registered manager] did the introduction and explained everything in fine detail, it was easy to understand. They came to my home, it was all inclusive, I asked questions, [registered manager] answered and asked me questions too. After they left I was very, very happy, it wasn’t a difficult decision to make.” The registered manager told us they preferred to complete assessments themselves as they enjoyed getting to know the people they will be supporting.

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. Nationally recognised assessment tools were utilised to support the effective delivery of care, for example, the Waterlow tool was completed for each person to ascertain their risk levels of developing pressure sores to their skin. Where outcomes indicated high risk, the management team worked with relevant healthcare professionals to source pressure relieving equipment.

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. We saw evidence of collaborative working between health care professionals and staff, where people had required professional involvement, their instructions had been clearly escalated to the staff team. Incident reports showed where staff were concerned about people and quickly escalated to relevant health and social care professionals. Staff worked alongside health and social care professionals to provide good outcomes for people; we saw examples of partnership working which resulted in a person’s damaged pressure area to heal. We saw an example where staff worked closely with a dental service to support a person who felt anxious about the visit. Their joined up working provided the person with a good experience and outcome following the visit.

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. We reviewed a person’s care plan and risk assessment for diabetes. There were clear details for staff on how to watch for symptoms of hyper and hypoglycaemia alongside other signs of complications of diabetes. Staff supported some people with meal preparation, care records detailed people’s preferences and some step-by-step guidance on how they liked their food prepared. A person told us, “My meals are always well presented, and they always wash my fruit and nicely prepare it. I tell them beforehand what I want.”

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 monitored people’s needs daily and informed the management team if there were changes to their needs. Regular care reviews were held, and ad hoc reviews were conducted in response to a change of people’s needs.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People had signed consent forms for care and treatment and medicine administration (where applicable). Staff documented in people’s daily records where they sought permission prior to supporting them. At the time of our inspection all people had mental capacity to make decisions about their care and support. The registered manager told us where they had previously conducted mental capacity assessments and held subsequent best interest meetings for people who lacked mental capacity. Staff had completed training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and understood people’s right to decline support.