Everkind Healthcare Limited

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 71 (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 assessed and regularly reviewed people’s health, care, wellbeing and communication needs to support effective care and treatment.

Care plans contained detailed information about people’s physical and mental health, daily routines and desired outcomes. They were person-centred and identified what people could do independently and where they required support. People and those close to them were involved in the assessment process.

People’s health conditions were clearly documented, with guidance for staff about signs of deterioration and the action they should take if concerns arose. Care plans were reviewed every six months, or sooner when a person’s needs changed. This helped staff maintain an up-to-date understanding of people’s needs and enabled care arrangements to be adjusted when required.

The provider delivered care and treatment in line with people’s assessed needs. Care plans contained guidance about people’s health conditions, identified risks and the support staff should provide.

Recognised assessment tools were used to identify and review risks, including nutritional needs and the risk of pressure damage. Staff used an electronic care-record system to document the care and support provided. Care records included monitoring of fluid intake and urine output, catheter observations and repositioning. This enabled changes in people’s needs to be identified and supported continuity between staff. Care plans were routinely reviewed and spot checks provided additional opportunities to assess whether care continued to meet people’s needs

The provider worked effectively with people and healthcare partners to support coordinated care and continuity when people moved between services.

Care plans were updated following assessments by healthcare professionals. For example, when an occupational therapist assessed a person and recommended new equipment, the care plan was amended to record the equipment provided and guide staff on its safe use. Information remained consistent when people were admitted to hospital and discharged back to the service, helping staff understand their ongoing care arrangements and maintain continuity.

Staff had access to people’s care plans and electronic records, which contained up-to-date information about their assessed needs, preferences and the professionals involved in their care. Staff also used handover meetings to communicate changes in people’s needs, ensuring that those providing support had the relevant information to deliver coordinated and consistent care.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing in ways that promoted independence, choice and control. Staff encouraged people to make healthier choices and helped them access healthcare services when needed.

One staff member described accompanying a person to appointments with different professionals and encouraging them to attend GP appointments when they were reluctant to go. They explained the potential benefits to the person’s health and said, “I take them to appointments and encourage them. Sometimes they do not want to go, so I have to encourage.”

The provider did not always effectively monitor people’s care to demonstrate that their health needs and expected outcomes were being consistently monitored and achieved.
One person’s care plan required staff to monitor their bowel movements and seek medical advice if they had not opened their bowels for 3 days. However, staff did not complete the required monitoring. This reduced assurance that constipation would be identified and medical advice sought within the specified timescale. There was no evidence that the person experienced harm. The provider acknowledged the concern and introduced a bowel-monitoring task within the electronic care-record system.
Despite this concern, there was evidence that staff monitored other aspects of people’s health and responded when changes were identified. For example, when staff identified changes in a person’s catheter tubing, they sought advice from healthcare professionals and recorded the guidance received. This demonstrated that staff monitored changes in people’s health, sought appropriate professional advice and acted on the information provided.

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

Care plans recorded people’s capacity to make decisions and directed staff to seek consent before providing care and support. They reflected people’s wishes and preferences and guided staff to respect their decisions, including where these involved an element of risk. Where people required support with decision-making, relatives with the appropriate legal authority were involved.

Staff recognised people’s right to make their own decisions. One staff member described supporting a person who had capacity to manage their finances. Staff offered advice about saving while respecting the person’s choices on how they wished to spend their money.

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

Care plans recorded people’s capacity to make decisions and directed staff to seek consent before providing care and support. They reflected people’s wishes and preferences and guided staff to respect their decisions, including where these involved an element of risk. Where people required support with decision-making, relatives with the appropriate legal authority were involved.

Staff recognised people’s right to make their own decisions. One staff member described supporting a person who had capacity to manage their finances. Staff offered advice about saving while respecting the person’s choices on how they wished to spend their money.