Aspire South West London

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. This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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.

The provider conducted an initial assessment of people’s needs and wishes before offering to deliver care to them at home. This included meeting with the person and understanding what support they would like and how they would like it to be delivered. The provider ensured all the relevant people were involved in assessing and planning care plans including, any prospective new service user, relatives where applicable, community health and social care professionals and the registered manager. People and their relatives confirmed they engaged in this process. A relative told us, “Before we started to use this agency, they met with my [family member] and developed a care plan based on the council’s assessment.” Staff confirmed they received the full care plan and risk assessments before providing support, ensuring they understood how to meet the needs of people they supported. A staff member told us, “Upon being asked to support a new person with their package of care we receive all the guidance we need in the individuals care plan, which includes risk assessments.”

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.

People received care and support from staff according to their individually assessed personal, social and health care needs and wishes. One person told us, “My carer knows how I like things and helps me in the way I want.” Staff worked well-together and understood each person’s individual needs and how these should be met. A member of staff told us, “People’s care plans are personalised and easy to follow. They give us good information about people’s unique needs and how to meet them safely.” Staff undertook a range of training based on good practice principles and legislation which included dementia and mental health care awareness courses.

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.

People were supported by managers and staff who worked well-together with external health and social care professionals and bodies. Systems were in place to make sure information was shared in a timely manner by everyone involved in people’s package of care. This helped ensure a joined up, consistent approach to delivering safe and effective care to people in line with their individually assessed needs and preferences. A staff member told us, “We work well together as a team. Staff communicate effectively and support one another to ensure smooth service delivery.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to fully maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Staff were aware how to follow people’s agreed health care routines including, those related to moving and transferring and prevention falls, eating and drinking, and skin integrity care. One person told us, “My carer will call the doctor if she is concerned about me.” Staff described strong teamwork and clear communication processes. They consulted effectively with each other and with the office-based managers and supervisors, as well as external health and social care professionals and bodies when needed. Systems were in place to make sure information was shared in a timely manner by everyone involved in people’s packages of care. For example, staff consistently handed over important information between care staff to ensure everyone remained up to date with peoples changing care needs and wishes.

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 and support was regularly reviewed to ensure it was meeting their assessed needs and expected outcomes. Systems were in place to monitor the care and support provided to people to ensure this remained effective. This included regular reviews of care plans, incidents, complaints and feedback from people using the service and their families, and spot checks to observe staffs working practices during home visits.

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

The provider was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People told us staff always asked for their consent and involved them in daily choices about the personal care and support they received at home. Managers and staff understood people’s capacity to make decisions about their care and support using people’s preferred method of communication. A staff member told us, “Before I provide support to anyone, I explain what I’m doing, and I respect the person’s right to refuse care. I always follow people’s capacity assessment as recorded in the person’s care plan.” Care plans documented people’s mental capacity and decision‑making arrangements. Managers and staff had received MCA and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) training.