ICare (GB) Limited - Runcorn

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 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 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 50 (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 always make sure people’s care and treatment were effective because they did not always check and discuss people’s health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. We found care records had been neglected over a period of time and not all information was not up to date. This meant staff could not be sure they had the correct information to deliver effective and timely care and support. People and their loved ones told us, “I don’t think we have ever had a formal review of the care plan”, “There was a care plan discussed, but when we wish to make changes, for example, making sure there is continuity and times of calls are adhered to. There is not review and no changes implemented” and “The service is not meeting his needs as identified in the care plan.”

The provider did not always plan and deliver people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. Improvements were needed to ensure staff planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them ensuring this was in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. Feedback from people and their loved ones was mixed with some people telling us staff did not always follow care plans including moving and handling or food preparation plans. People and their loved ones said, “The carers are not well trained in dealing with dementia as they don’t encourage Dad to have a shower as he will say he doesn’t want one” and “What I have observed, the carers do not always say what they are going to do next and they are in too much of a hurry.”

The provider did not always work well across teams and services to support people. They did not always share their assessment of people’s needs when people moved between different services. The provider could not be assured they had a system in place for staff to communicate with each other which enabled them to effectively deliver people’s care and support. Some staff told us they were not confident information would be shared between team effectively and in a timely manner. We saw staff made timely referrals and worked with other agencies to ensure people's treatment needs were met.

The provider did not always support people to manage their health and wellbeing, so people could not always maximise their independence, choice and control.The provider could not be assured people’s health plans were current or accurate and there was a lack of information to demonstrate these were regularly reviewed with people. We received mixed feedback from people and their loved ones, comments included, “I don’t think we have ever had a formal review of the care plan” and “She has a care plan that identifies her needs.”

The provider had not always routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it and did not meet the expectations of people themselves. We saw when people needs were reviewed this was not always in line with the providers own policies. We spoke with one person who told us despite having raised a complaint to the provider, the issue was still occurring with changes not being made. The provider had implemented work recently to improve issues with monitoring which meant the most recent outcomes were positive and consistent.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Staff had received training around capacity and could describe what this meant in practice when asked. At the time of the assessment due to care plans being neglected the provider could not be assured mental capacity care plans, or what actions staff should take if there were concerns regarding this person’s mental capacity where relevant or current.