Daley Home Care

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 71 (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 before they started using the service, usually by the registered manager, to ensure their needs could be met. These assessments formed the basis of care plans. We found that the provider completed reviews with people about their care. Relatives and people told us they were involved in their care planning and reviews. The registered manager told us they updated care plans when people’s needs changed, however, we found inconsistencies in care plans, and they did not always provide up to date information about people. Following our feedback, the provider updated care plans during the assessment.

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.

We found that people were assessed for their dietary requirements and staff monitored food intake. We also found that staff monitored peoples skin integrity, when they were at risk of skin breakdown. This meant people received care and treatment in line with their assessed needs.

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.

Hospital passports were in place for people. Staff told us that they worked with health professionals such as district nurses and occupational therapists. A professional told us that staff were professional and asked for advice when needed.

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.

People's care records demonstrated they had been supported to access relevant health services, for example district nurses. People told us they are supported to contact health professionals. A professional told us that staff understood people’s health and care needs.

The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it.

People and their relatives told us that they were involved in review of care plans. We found client reviews completed detailing areas of support provided and gaining feedback in order to make improvements if required. These also included future plans people had. A professional told us that staff follow their professional advice to ensure good outcomes for people.

The provider did not always tell people about their rights around consent and did not always respect their rights when delivering care and treatment.

We found consent forms were in place, for example around medicines administration and sharing information. There was a mental capacity policy in place and most of the staff had in date mental capacity training. However, we were not assured training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 was effective as staff were not able to demonstrate skills or knowledge in this area. The registered manager did not understand their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and had not always completed mental capacity assessments as required under the Act. Following our feedback, mental capacity assessments were completed during the assessment. People and relatives told us staff ask people for their consent and explain what is happening and why.