Bamburgh Supported Living

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 inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.
 

This service scored 58 (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 had not always ensured people’s care and support were effective because they did not fully review and discuss people’s needs with them. Whilst people were supported to give feedback through service user meetings, these meetings lacked detail and did not always evidence meaningful engagement. Initial assessments of people’s needs had been completed. However, these did not always provide a comprehensive picture of people’s health, care and wellbeing needs.

Despite these concerns, we found staff knew people well and were generally able to describe people’s preferences, likes and dislikes, and how they wished to be supported.
 

The provider did not always plan and deliver people’s care and support with them, including what was important and mattered to them.

The provider did not always deliver care in line with Right support, right care, right culture principles. Staff and leaders did not demonstrate a robust understanding of these principles, and care records did not consistently show how people were supported to have choice, control and person-centred care.
 

The provider worked together across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing information about their needs when people moved between different services. Relevant information was shared with other health professionals to ensure people received appropriate healthcare input and support

The provider supported people to manage their health. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

People were supported to access healthcare services when needed, and staff worked with health professionals to help ensure people's health needs were understood and met. The provider made referrals to relevant health professionals when needed.
 

The provider did not always routinely monitor people’s care and support to continuously improve it. They did not always ensure outcomes were positive and consistent, or that they met the expectations of people themselves.

People were supported to review goals through their service user meetings. However, it was not always clear whether these goals reflected what was meaningful and important to the individual, as they often focused on identified needs and current living arrangements rather than future wishes or longer-term plans. Records did not always demonstrate how people were supported to consider any changes to their care or explore longer term goals and aspirations.
 

The provider did not always ensure people were informed about their rights in relation to consent. While decision-specific Mental Capacity Act assessments had been completed and appropriate authorisations sought from the relevant authorities, records relating to decision-making lacked sufficient detail. We found people were subject to a number of restrictions and, although relevant health and social care professionals had been involved in decision-making, assessments and best interest records did not always clearly document their views or demonstrate how these had been considered. As a result, the provider could not always fully evidence the rationale for decisions made in people’s best interests or demonstrate less restrictive options had been considered.