55 Sandwich Road

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.

There was a regular schedule of reviews to ensure care continued to meet people’s needs and expectations. These were conducted alongside people, their representative and health and care professionals. People’s care plans were updated regularly in response to their changing needs, to ensure staff had up to date guidance on how to care for them in a safe and person-centred way.

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. There was clear guidance setting out best practice for how staff should care for people in a way that was safe and respected their rights. There was regular engagement with services involved in people’s care to ensure this remained the case. The service closely aligned with the principles of RSRCRC and promoted the rights of people with a learning disability and autistic people to have empowered and positive lives based on choice and least restrictive options.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They shared thorough assessments of people’s needs when they moved between different services, so people only needed to tell their story once.

People were supported by a small and consistent team of staff who knew people exceptionally well. Although people had dedicated “key workers” who would help coordinate their care and plan activities, all staff were equally knowledgeable about people’s needs and had clear guidance on how to do so. For both people being supported, having a structure to their day was important. For instance, one person required a daily schedule around their breakfast and drive into the community to alleviate their distress in the morning. We saw that from daily notes that people’s need for routine was being respected, and they received continuity in care, whilst being challenged and empowered to explore new interests and achieve personal goals. Staff when asked what they were most proud of universally told us it was the team they worked with, and how they worked collaboratively to support people in having the best quality of life. One staff member told us “We work well as a team and support each other. The thing I’m most proud of is our teamwork and the consistency of support we provide”.

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.

The provider focused on ensuring that people received the support they needed to live happy and healthy lives, promoting both physical and mental wellbeing. People were supported be physically active on a daily basis including one person who was working towards a goal of regularly attending the gym. The importance of healthy eating was also actively promoted at the service, and we observed people were eating a varied and nutritious diet that aligned with personal preferences. People were supported to access regular appointments with health professionals such as annual learning disability health checks, and as needed if concerns arose about their health.

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. There were robust systems in place to monitor people’s experience of care, including reviewing of any instances of distress. These incidences were regularly monitored to determine what factors might be causing a person to become distressed, and what those instances might represent. People’s care was regularly reviewed to ensure it continued to meet their needs and was helping people achieve the things they wanted from their care. This was based on a system of structured care reviews with people and their representatives, and monthly meetings where people would plan for the month ahead with their staff team.

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

Staff were knowledgeable about the principles of consent and could describe how they would recognise and confirm that each person was giving consent, such as around support with their personal care. There was clear guidance for how staff should ensure consent was given when supporting people in all areas of their care, and this was clearly recorded as happening in people’s daily care notes. Where people were determined to lack mental capacity to make certain decisions, this was assessed and best interest meetings held with the person, their representatives and wider health and care professionals to make appropriate decisions on people’s behalf. These decisions were regularly reviewed to ensure they remained in the person’s best interest.