Ability Care Solutions Ltd

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 67 (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 did not always ensure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.Information related to people’s’ health conditions and associated risks had not always been assessed and detailed within people’s care plans. For example, 1 person’s assessment detailed they may use laxatives, however there were no details regarding this within the person’s care plan. This meant we were not assured robust systems were in place to capture information at the assessment stage to provide safe care to people .

Systems were in place to capture information as part of the assessment process to determine if the service could support people safely. A care plan was then developed.

Professionals told us the service contacted them when assessments were required. They told us, “They are prompt with providing care records for assessments or night sit reviews for our end of life patients” and “They always request moving and handling assessments when required and ask for equipment/extra help when required.”

The provider did not always plan and deliver people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. The lack of guidance in care plans and risk assessments, inconsistent medicines practice and gaps in staff training meant the service could not fully evidence that care provided to people aligned with best practice guidance. This placed people at risk of receiving unsafe and ineffective care.

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 and the management team provided us with examples of how they worked with health and social care professionals to support people’s needs. One professional told us, “Ability Care have always rung with any concerns or if they need any advice from us as a service and vice versa.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. One staff member told us, “I encourage the person to manage their own health and maintain independence. We do this by listening to the people we care for and let them have a voice and make decisions for themselves.”One professional told us staff “always respected the patient” including balancing healthier options with a person’s preferences. Staff encouraged hydration, comfort, movement and engagement in daily activities. Examples included creating opportunities for stimulation, supporting emotional wellbeing and prompting involvement in simple tasks. One relative told us, “[Relative] chats a lot about [relative’s] life and they chat with [relative] about a book that [relative] has written.”

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 experienced positive outcomes whilst being supported by the service. We were given examples of how people’s lives had improved. This included supporting a person successfully to attend hospital for a procedure and supporting another person’s rehabilitation.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Systems were in place for people to consent to the provision of care. Verbal consent over the phone was obtained before the service began, with a consent form completed later.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA.Staff were aware of the MCA and the need to ask for consent. Relatives said staff routinely explained what they were doing and sought consent before providing support. They told us, “The carers are very kind with [relative]. They are all female. They are kind with [relative] and gentle. They do communicate with [relative] and tell [relative] what they're going to do next and check that [relative] is okay for them to do that” and “They check in with [relative] all the time as they are helping [relative] and making sure that [relative] is okay with what they're doing and are very gentle.”