Olive Tree Services

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 Good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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 prior to them moving into the home to ensure these could be met safely. People and their relatives where appropriate had been involved in planning their care and reviews.

People’s care records were person centred. An assessment of people’s needs included communication, health, emotional well-being and mobility. People had regular check-ups with health and social care professionals to support them to achieve positive outcomes.

Staff demonstrated a good knowledge of people’s needs and told us they were kept up to date about any changes. One staff member told us, “Oh I try to involve people in care by following a care plan and discussing with them according to their needs and wants.”

People told us they were involved in reviews of their care. People said, “I have a care plan. I am in touch with the proprietor [registered manager]” and “They [registered manager] came out and we had a meeting.”

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.

The provider used recognised assessment tools to help determine the most appropriate care and treatment people required.

Some people were supported with food and drink intake. One person told us, “Yes, they [staff] make meals. I tell them what I will have.” Another said, “They [staff] understand what I like.”

People’s dietary needs and preferences were recorded in their care plan and staff were knowledgeable about people’s dietary needs. One member of staff said, “I always follow people’s preferences.”

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. People’s assessments and needs were shared with professionals when they moved between services.

Visiting professionals and therapists provided information and guidance for staff which was recorded in people’s care plans. Staff maintained a record of their visit and outcomes.

People told us they had access to external health and social care resources such as GPs, dentists and opticians. One person told us, “They [staff] have supported me to attend appointments.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and well-being 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.

The provider ensured relevant referrals were made when there may be underlying health issues that needed additional support. Where healthcare professionals had provided guidance for staff this was documented in people’s care plans. For example, one person’s care plan contained detail guidance from a speech and language therapist [SALT]. This guidance helped staff to support the person with their communication skills.

People’s care and treatment was routinely monitored to help ensure needs were met and care could be improved. Outcomes for people were consistent and met their expectations. The provider ensured outcomes were positive and consistent, and they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

People and relatives were happy with the service provided, and felt staff monitored people’s needs well. One relative said, “I suggested they [staff] take photos of where [person] is going. The carer took photos and it works really well. It has helped with their anxiety.” Another relative said, “Staff are very kind and respond to any request. [I had] a nice experience with them. I would recommend them.”

People were supported to have control over day-to-day choices. Staff were patient with people, giving them time to make their own choices. People and families were involved in core decisions about their care.

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. Staff had received training regarding the MCA and policies were in line with the principles of the MCA.

Mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions were in place as required

People told us staff always sought their consent before supporting them. One person told us, “They [staff] ask for consent. Reliability is good.”

One member of staff told us, “I ensure I have people’s consent by explaining what support I am providing, asking for their agreement, and respecting their right to make choices or refuse support.”