Moorville House

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 83 (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.

Staff completed a comprehensive assessment of people's needs before they started to provide care and support. This assessment included the views and experiences of the person, their family and professionals who knew them well. These assessments focused on the person, respecting their background, family, and culture. The provider considered the views of people who already lived at the service before agreeing to let new people move in.

For people who had several failed placements or lived in unsuitable services the transitions into the service were carefully planned in collaboration with the person, their families and health and social care professionals.

The service 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 management team were up to date with best practice guidelines for supporting people with learning disabilities and autism.

The provider had a system to ensure policies and procedures were comprehensive, up-to-date policies and had all the necessary information staff needed to care for people using the service.

Staff undertook a range of training to help deliver evidence-based care. Staff told us training was helpful. Staff regularly met with the registered manager to discuss their work and best practice. Staff followed and applied their learning in line with professional guidance, such as the following the principles of positive behaviour support.

The provider had a proactive approach to risk management, which balanced risk and opportunity. Incidents were discussed in team meetings and daily handovers. Where people had incidents of distress, monitoring was in place enable people to receive the least restrictive support possible. Staff were involved in de briefing sessions following incidents where people were distressed, to reflect upon what went well, what could be done better and if any changes were needed to the staff’s approach.

Staff knew about people's needs and demonstrated clear person-centred approaches. They viewed people as individuals and discussed the importance of their relationships with people. We observed how staff stayed calm even when things went wrong. For example, a person was becoming anxious. Staff noticed this straight away and responded quietly and respectfully reassuring both people, saying “Its ok” and “Would you like to have some space, would you like to go to your bedroom.” This reassured the person immediately and diffused the situation.

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 and staff worked well with health and social care professionals. There were various professional involved with the service such as speech and language therapists, occupational therapists and learning disability nurses. People’s physical and emotional needs were well documented and clear records of professional input and outcomes were recorded. Feedback from partners evidenced the service worked well with them. For example, one visiting professional had commented, “Welcoming, friendly, nice place, engaging, supportive, caring, person centred.”

The management team and staff demonstrated how they responded when a person's anxiety levels increased due to triggers in the community. They promptly engaged with several services to explore ways of reducing the person’s anxieties and increasing their ability to cope with change.

The service always supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to fully 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 exceptionally well to live healthier lives, access healthcare services and support. Staff worked in partnership with families and professionals and advocated strongly for people, to ensure people had access to optimal healthcare. This focused, person centred approach ensured people had access to appropriate health treatments and prevented readmission or admission to hospital. For example, we saw examples of a young person with a severe learning disability, autism and a long history of distressed behaviours. Several placement breakdowns resulted in them being detained under the Mental Health Act and admitted to hospital. After intensive support, resilience and interventions from the staff team at Moorville House, this person had developed their confidence, self-reliance, ability to cope with sensory input and independent problem solving. Although the person continued to have moments where they became unsettled, they remained stable and happy in the service and there was a significant reduction in medication given to the person. In recent feedback the person said, I am happy and feel involved in my care. I feel staff are always on hand and very helpful in situations and staff always promote my independence. I have always got an option in what I am involved in.” One relative told us, “When my loved one became ill with their mental health and needed to be hospitalised, they not only supported my loved one, but they also supported me through the crisis.”

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 outcomes for people using the service truly reflected the principles and values of 'Right support, right care, right culture' in the promotion of choice, control, independence and inclusion. People and their families were seen as the experts in their life with a focus on what they can do first, and any help they needed second.

The provider embraced partnership working with other health and social care organisations to achieve better outcomes for people. This included the local hospital staff, GPs, district nurse, chiropodists and mental health liaison teams. One visiting professional commented, “[Name] is very pleased with their progress, and they can evidence this. [Name] sets their own goals with the staff team. [Name] said all the staff at Moorville House are nice. [Name] is pleased with his positive progress.”

Staff had taken great care to ensure peoples voices and choices were heard and to enable people to build and stay in control of their own lives. For example, one person was supported to transition into their own accommodation within the community. The person frequently accessed the community independently and participated in various activities, such as piano lessons. They expressed the next step in their life was to move to a supported living environment. Staff listened and initiated communication with the local authority and housing professionals. As a result, this person fully transitioned into their own accommodation and continued to access the community regularly. Another person, who had previously been reluctant to join group activities, with staff support began participating in baking and gardening sessions with others in the service. As a result, there was a marked improvement in the person’s communication. One relative told us, “The staff team are always teaching life skills, such making a sandwich. They always look to accommodate if possible.” Another said, “They support my loved one to go out for a coffee, every day if they wish to go. It is amazing just to get them out.”

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

People were supported to make their own decisions about their care and support wherever possible. The provider was working in line with the Mental Capacity Act. The service was skilled in how it obtained people's consent for care and treatment, adapting their approach to suit individuals needs and involving them in related decisions and assessing capacity when needed. Records showed us where assessments demonstrated a person was unable to make a specific decision capacity assessments were completed and best interest decisions had been made with the involvement of the person, family and appropriate health or care professionals.