Opportunities for Adults and Children

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 were effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. This included initial assessments prior to support commencing, as well as reviews at agreed intervals or when people’s needs changed. This helped ensure care plans remained current and reflective of people’s needs.

People, and some relatives, confirmed people’s care planning records were reflective of their support needs and wishes. Records showed regular reviews took place, and monthly audits of care planning documentation were completed. Several relatives told us care plans were up to date and reflective of people’s preferences, describing how staff knew people well and understood their likes, dislikes and interests. Comments included, “They do listen and know his likes and dislikes… he has lots of interests and they know what they are,” and “She does get the care she wants.”

We found some care plans lacked detail in places; however, staff were able to clearly describe people’s needs and how they supported them. Mixed feedback was received from relatives about their involvement in care planning and reviews. While some relatives told us they were involved and informed, others said they were not always aware of reviews or would have welcomed more regular contact to discuss updates. Comments included, “It would be nice if every 6 months there was a quick touch‑base,” and “Not involved in his care plan… I don’t know because I’m not included.”

Some people had capacity to make their own decisions and could choose whether they wanted relatives involved in their care planning and reviews. Relatives shared differing experiences of involvement, and this varied across the service. The provider had identified through their own governance processes the level of detail within care plans and communication with relatives could be strengthened. They had begun taking steps to address these areas while ensuring their approach continued to centre on people’s own wishes and rights.

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. Individualised strategies were in place for people who experienced anxiety related behaviours, mobility needs, or risks to skin integrity.This meant people received care that was personalised, proactive, and aligned with best practice guidance to support their safety, wellbeing and independence.

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 registered manager described close working relationships with health and social care professionals. Records showed the service worked closely with many professionals, including social workers, community nurses, GPs and other specialists to help keep people safe and ensure their needs were met promptly.

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.

People’s healthcare needs were identified in their care plans. This included the level of support they needed to maintain good health. Where people had specific health conditions, such as diabetes, staff received training relevant to those conditions and worked closely with people, families and health professionals. This helped ensure staff understood people’s needs and supported people to manage their conditions safely and in the way they preferred.

Staff and leaders shared examples of how people were supported to maintain a healthy, balanced diet and make choices that improved their wellbeing. For example, 1 person was supported to explore healthier eating habits and access community‑based resources that helped them plan meals and make dietary changes. These personalised approaches helped people achieve positive health outcomes. One person told us how they had been supported to lose weight and exercise regularly.

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.

Staff recorded details of the care and support they provided, and senior staff monitored these records to confirm people’s needs were being met. One person told us how they had been supported to lose weight and exercise regularly, which had contributed to improved physical and emotional health.

The provider also used audits, incident reviews and feedback from people, relatives and staff to monitor outcomes and identify areas for improvement.

Where helpful, the service sought advice from health professionals about suitable equipment or reviewed support levels to help people progress towards their goals. Staff and leaders described how they adapted support in response to people’s progress, ensuring care remained effective and outcome‑focused. For example, staff supported people to develop their independent living skills by gradually reducing support as their confidence and abilities increased. This proactive, personalised approach helped reduce risks and improved people’s wellbeing and overall quality of life.

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

There were policies and procedures in place to ensure valid consent to care was obtained. Staff had a good knowledge around the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and knew how to practically apply this in their everyday roles. They understood the importance of asking for consent prior to providing care and support, and people confirmed staff asked for their consent before delivering any support or care.

The provider took a considered and person-centred approach to assessing people’s mental capacity. Assessments were carried out over a period of time to maximise people’s involvement, considering things such as the best time of day, the person’s preferred communication style, and using information in formats people could understand. This helped ensure people were supported to make their own decisions wherever possible.