Social Care Solutions Ltd (Cambridge)

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.

Care plans were clear and gave guidance for staff about people’s individual needs, risks and outcomes. Care plans reflected the current needs of the people we met. One person told us "I have a support plan. I can access it if I want to. It is in a red file. I was involved and we have regular reviews.” Staff we spoke with had good knowledge of people’s individual needs.

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 told us how their care and treatment was planned with them. Care plans included information about people’s annual health checks and clinical reviews.

Staff completed training so they had the right skills and knowledge to support people with a learning disability and/or autistic people. Senior staff sought out additional and specialist training for staff so they could provide high quality care, for example, stoma and catheter care training. Relatives told us that staff knew how to communicate with their family member and were aware of their health needs. One staff member told us how it was a “learning process day in day out” and told us about how recent, in-person, specialist training had helped them support someone with complex needs.

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.

The service inducted staff to just one setting so that they got to know the people there and their needs.

The staff had regular meetings to share updates about the people they support and share best practice.

Staff were positive about their colleagues, managers and the support from external professionals.

We saw evidence of staff working closely with other teams involved in people’s care. Important guidance, referrals and correspondence with other teams was detailed in care plans.

One relative told us their family member’s transition from their previous accommodation was well-planned and managed with known carers accompanying them.

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.

Care plans included people’s healthy goals and aspirations, for example to cook their own meals. We observed people choosing to go for a walk and access the garden with staff support. People told us about guidance they were given from staff and external professionals regarding healthy eating. Staff told us “all activities are to improve people’s physical and mental wellbeing.”

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.
Care plans referred to people having regular health reviews and recorded the outcomes of health appointments and treatments. People’s goals and aspirations were reviewed monthly and people told us about their achievements.
One person told us "One of my goals was to have a pet, and this had to also be discussed with the landlord as they have specifics about the pets we can have." This goal was achieved, and we saw their pet during a site visit.
Staff shared evidence of people’s individual achievements explaining the impact even daily, small goals have had.
One relative told us how their family member’s chronic disease had improved since moving to the service and they had now become more active and involved.

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

We observed staff seeking consent before providing support. Staff told us different ways they could present information so people could give their consent without verbally communicating. People told us staff asked for their consent, respected their decisions and they had choices. One person said, “My flat, my rules”. Daily records showed consent was gained by staff before supporting someone, and choices were respected. Staff told us they had Mental Capacity Act 2005 training and what this meant to them in practice. Some people were assessed as not having the mental capacity to make complex decisions. One staff member told us that when a decision had to be made on someone’s behalf “It has to be done in their best interests and least restrictive, it is a multi-disciplinary decision. It needs to be done in the right way.”

The provider completed risk assessments for any restrictions in place for example for the use of a wheelchair lap belt and covert medication. When required the provider completed Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 assessments and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) referrals. Staff demonstrated that they understood restrictive practice and gave examples of using person centred practice and positive behaviour support. Staff gave examples of different ways of gaining consent from people who did not use words to communicate. This meant that people did not experience unnecessary restrictions.