Walsingham Support - Langdon Park

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 assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to 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 across a range of areas. These included physical and mental health, behaviours, communication and personal care support. People and their relatives participated in assessments and periodic reviews of them. When required specialist assessments were undertaken by health and social care professionals. The guidance they developed was incorporated into people’s care plans. A member of staff told us, “We follow the care plans. We read them ourselves and discuss it together.” This meant people received the care and support they required to effectively meet their assessed needs.

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 were supported by staff following research-informed good practice. Staff received training and followed the guidance developed by healthcare professionals to provide effective care and support. For example, where people presented with behavioural support needs staff followed people’s individual positive behaviour support plans to reduce people’s anxiety. These were developed by behavioural specialists following the assessment of incidents and people’s individual needs. One relative told us, “Staff are caring and alert to challenging situations.” This meant people who presented with behavioural support needs were supported effectively and in line with best practice.

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.

The manager promoted continuous and effective communication within the team to identify, monitor and meet people’s changing needs. Staff met daily to handover important information and a communication book was used to share details about people’s care and support. Care records were updated throughout the day and the team met to discuss meeting people’s needs at team meetings.

People benefitted from the staff teams’ engagement with other services. Staff supported people’s engagement with hospital departments including neurology and urology and facilitated other healthcare professionals visiting people at the service. For example, the service made referrals to, and received input from, specialists focusing on epilepsy, mobility, falls, behaviour and safe swallowing. The provider’s collaborative approach enabled people’s needs to be met effectively.

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.

At the last inspection we found people did not have a choice of food and little access to fresh food. The failure to support people to make choices about their diet and to ensure food was nutritious was a breach of regulation 14 of the Health and Social Care Act 2028. Meeting nutritional and hydration needs. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach.

At this inspection we found people were supported to choose from a range of healthy food options. Staff used a pictorial menu to enable people to make choices about what they ate, and alternative dishes were available. Staff encouraged people to eat fresh fruit and vegetables, including those who had previously declined to do so Where it was in their care plans this supported people’s weight reduction goal.

People were supported to access the services they required to remain healthy. One person told us, “I see the doctors and dentists. I feel well.” Another person told us, “Staff took me to see the doctor.” People were supported to attend a range of appointments with healthcare professionals including GP’s, podiatrists, visiting nurses, occupational therapists and speech and language therapists. The registered manager used an appointments tracker system to ensure people were supported to arrange and attended non-urgent appointments such as check-ups and reviews.

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.

The provider continuously monitored people’s changing needs. People’s needs were regularly reviewed and reassessed. People’s care plans were updated to reflect people’s changing needs. For example, one person’s care plan had been updated 3 times in 6 months to provide guidance to staff on their rapidly changing needs.

People’s satisfaction with outcomes was gathered by the manager and the provider through a range of means. These included reviews, keyworking meetings, feedback from people and relatives as well as surveys. The provider acted on this information to meet people’s preferences and improve their outcomes.

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

People consented to the care and support they received. The provider sought at all times to use the least restrictive option. For example, with their agreement one person was supported to have their bed lowered and a safety mat installed next to it, rather than be restricted by bedrails.

When required people were supported with mental capacity assessments. Where it was necessary to deprive people of their liberty to keep them safe, the provider ensured that authorisation was sought from local authorities. The provider retained records of deprivation of liberty safeguards which detailed the lawful restrictions in place and the dates by which they expired.