Archived: Willow Home Care Ltd

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 requires good. At this assessment the rating has changed to Inadequate. This meant there were widespread and significant shortfalls in people’s care, support and outcomes.

This service scored 25 (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 did not make sure people’s care and treatment was effective because they did not check and discuss people’s health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. The manager told us pre assessments were completed to identify people’s needs. However, no evidence could be found of the pre assessments completed as the manager told us they shredded them after a care plan was in place. People and relatives told us they had not been involved in the development of their care plan. People’s care plans and risk assessments did not provide consistency or correct information of people’s needs. The provider has told us that since the assessment they have taken action to improve on the concerns raised and have implemented new records.

The provider did not plan and deliver people’s care and treatment with them. They did not follow legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. There was no evidence people had been involved in planning their care and support. People’s capacity to make decisions had not been considered when changes were made to their care and support. When people’s needs had changed, staff had not reviewed their care plans to make sure the guidance was relevant and accurate. For example, where people’s health needs changed, this was not reflected in their care plan.

The provider did not work well across teams and services to support people. They did not share their assessment of people’s needs when moving between different services. Due to the lack of information provided within care plans and risk assessment we could not be assured information would be shared or handed over to other agencies safely to ensure a smooth and consistent transition. Care plans did not contain essential information to identify where people received additional support by separate agencies. Since the assessment the provider has told us that care plans have been reviewed to reflect assessed care needs. This placed people at risk as both sets of staff did not have access to information about the support the other staff had given.

The provider did not always support people to manage their health and wellbeing, so people could not always maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff did not always support people to live healthier lives, or where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Staff and management did not always recognise when they needed to call for medical help or refer people to healthcare professionals. For example, during the assessment we were made aware a person who did not have a history of having seizures had a seizure 4 days prior to our visit. No action was taken to complete a further assessment or communicate with family and health professionals to ensure the person was safe and staff were trained and aware of the person’s up to date needs. We prompted the manager to look into this during the assessment.

The provider did not routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They did not ensure that outcomes were positive and consistent, or that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. The provider did not have a process to monitor the outcomes of the support provided by staff. People’s needs were not reviewed regularly to assess if the support being provided was appropriate and meeting people’s current needs.

The provider did not tell people about their rights around consent or respect these when delivering care and treatment. Since this assessment the provider has told us they have implemented consent statements. The provider did not provide detail to people or relatives around their rights to consent when delivering care and treatment. The provider did not have any evidence of people’s mental capacity assessments or evidence they had followed the Mental Capacity Act to obtain people’s consent. Care plans did not clearly show where people had mental capacity or if they did not have mental capacity. Training evidence provided at the time of this assessment showed us staff had not received training in the Mental Capacity Act. This left people at risk of not having their rights and choices respected.