MidCo Care

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 assessed comprehensively and regularly reviewed. Care plans and support records clearly reflected people's health, wellbeing, communication and behavioural support needs. Records reviewed were up-to-date and provided staff with guidance to support people consistently.

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.

Support reflected recognised approaches for autistic people and people with a learning disability. Positive Behaviour Support (PBS), ABC charts and behaviour assessment tools were used to understand behaviours, identify triggers and inform individualised support. Staff worked with healthcare and specialist professionals where required to promote wellbeing, independence and positive outcomes.

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.

Staff worked alongside healthcare professionals, behavioural specialists, local authorities and other agencies to support people effectively. We saw examples of professional involvement in reviews relating to medicines, restrictive practices and support planning. Staff demonstrated knowledge of people's needs and worked together to provide continuity of support.

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 were supported to access healthcare services and specialist professionals when required. Care records reflected healthcare involvement and monitoring arrangements. We saw examples of people being supported to maintain healthy lifestyles and access activities that promoted wellbeing and quality of life.

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.

Reviews showed that positive support strategies were helping people achieve meaningful outcomes over time. For example, people who had previously chosen not to have furniture in their apartment. Through gradual, individualised support, furniture and other items were introduced at their pace. People had continued to tolerate these changes for several months, demonstrating progress in their comfort within their home environment.

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

Mental Capacity Act processes were generally embedded within the service. Staff demonstrated an understanding of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act and how these applied to people’s care and support. We saw evidence of decision-specific mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions that supported people’s rights and choices. Where further assurance was required in relation to some restrictions and Court of Protection authorisation, leaders responded promptly, reviewed the arrangements and strengthened oversight. Restrictions were considered with relevant professionals to help ensure they remained necessary, proportionate and as least restrictive as possible.