Helping Hands Ferndown

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.

People’s needs were assessed before care started. Once people started receiving care and support, the assessment process was ongoing to help identify if people’s needs changed.

People were fully involved in discussions about the care they needed and how they wished it to be delivered. Regular reviews ensured they continued to receive the right level of support. People signed their assessments and care plans to show their agreement. Staff told us they understood people’s current needs and knew where to access up‑to‑date information on the electronic care planning system.

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 service used electronic systems effectively to oversee the day-to-day care provided to people. Feedback from people was positive; a person told us, “Staff conduct themselves in a proper and professional manner.” Staff used the electronic recording system when attending care visits and completed comprehensive notes which included required tasks as set in people’s care plans. The system alerted the office if any tasks were not completed, enabling timely oversight and follow-up.

The provider’s quality team reviewed policies and procedures to ensure they reflected best practice guidance. Any updated policies or guidance were shared with the management to be cascaded to the wider staff team. Staff training was regularly refreshed so staff were aware of any changes in best practice. Staff spoke positively about the training. A staff member told us, “I feel my training has been consistent with the customer's needsthat I assist."

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.

Management were familiar with what services were available to support people with their different health needs. Leaders contacted health and social care professionals regularly and supported people with referrals and ongoing health appointments. For example, referrals were made to district nurses to support skin integrity management.

When external stakeholders had input into people’s care, the provider documented this feedback.

The service used an electronic care planning system to promptly identify changes or concerns about people’s care. Care plans were uploaded to the electronic care planning system, with changes to care required communicated to staff to review. This helped to ensure staff working at different times were supporting people in a consistent way using the most current information about their needs.

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.

Some people were able to arrange their own healthcare appointments, and this independence was respected and supported. The provider told us staff assisted with healthcare arrangements when it was requested or a need was identified. Staff told us they felt the service empowered people’s choice and independence. A staff member said, “[Some] people just need some help to stay independent. Things like cooking their dinners and taking people shopping means that people still have control of their lives. We all need a bit of help from time to time. Some just want to stay home where they feel comfortable and safe and we can make that happen.”

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’s care needs were reviewed regularly, enabling any necessary changes to be made promptly. They were supported by staff who knew them well and understood their individual needs. Staff monitored people’s health and reported any changes or concerns to leaders so that timely action could be taken to support positive outcomes. For example, staff monitored hydration and escalated concerns such as low fluid intake or reduced catheter output where catheter bags were in use.

Staff also monitored people’s general wellbeing during visits and shared any issues with managers. A member of the office team told us, “The communication is very good. They (staff) are very good about coming back to the office and reporting things. It alerts us that there are changes there.”

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

Staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and their need to assume people had capacity to make their own decisions, and that consent should be sought prior to carrying out care. A staff member said, “I always ask for consent if I do something. I may try and encourage the person if they decline but if they still refuse, I won’t do it.”

Records showed that when a person might lack capacity to make specific decisions, assessments were carried out in line with legislation. Best-interest decisions involved the person, their representatives, and relevant professionals. Feedback confirmed good practice, with people feeling included in decisions about their care. When asked a service user confirmed consent was always sort, “Yes, on all occasions.”