Happy Valley Home Care Limited

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 contained detailed information about people’s health conditions, personal histories, routines, communication needs, preferences and desired outcomes. People’s involvement was evident through care plans written in their voice and signed consent documentation. Reviews identified changes in people’s mobility, health and support needs, and staff updated care plans and risk assessments following changes or incidents. People and relatives confirmed they were involved in agreeing their care and could ask for their support to be increased or reduced as their needs changed. One person explained they had reduced their care from several calls each day to 1 call and knew they could request more support if needed.
 

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.
Reviews and incident records showed examples of care changing in response to people’s outcomes. These included increasing the number of care workers attending calls following a deterioration in mobility, adapting transfer arrangements, changing call times to support safe medicines administration and updating care plans following falls or changes in need. People and relatives said support was flexible and could be increased, reduced or rearranged in response to their circumstances.
The records included measures such as mobility equipment, pressure care monitoring, emergency pendants, support with nutrition and hydration, and guidance for responding to deterioration.
Professionals described staff as skilled and receptive to their recommendations. A professional said staff implemented new moving and handling techniques and equipment recommendations, including changes the number of care workers attending calls, when assessments showed this was appropriate.
 

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.
Staff used care plans, paper records, an electronic care system and messages from the office to communicate changes. Call records showed staff contacted relatives, managers and health professionals when people’s health or mobility deteriorated. For example, staff monitored 1 person’s increasing pain, breathlessness and mobility difficulties and escalated concerns to the on-call team and the person’s relative. Records also showed staff sought support from GPs, district nurses, occupational therapists, crisis teams, NHS 111 and social care professionals when required.
Professionals described communication as prompt and said staff raised concerns early. One professional reported, “There was a genuine sense of teamwork working together for the benefit of all” and said staff made appropriate referrals when people needed community health or social care support. Another professional said the provider worked proactively with them and accepted recommendations when people’s support arrangements changed.
 

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.
Staff monitored people’s physical and emotional wellbeing during visits and supported them with personal care, oral care, nutrition, hydration, mobility, medicines and access to health appointments. Records showed staff identified and escalated changes such as pain, reduced mobility, poor appetite, confusion and signs of infection. One relative said staff had recognised signs of a urinary tract infection and reported this to the office, which contacted the GP so treatment could be arranged. People also described how staff encouraged them to remain independent rather than taking over tasks.
 

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 the care provided at each visit and reported changes in people’s health, mobility, appetite, behaviour and independence. Care plans promoted independence and gave staff practical guidance about people’s health conditions, mobility, falls, skin integrity, nutrition and hydration, communication and medicines.
 

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.
Care plans recorded people’s capacity to make decisions and showed they were involved in agreeing their care, routines and desired outcomes. Staff understood they should explain what they were doing, seek permission before providing support and respect people’s choices and refusals. People confirmed this happened in practice. One person said staff asked permission before supporting them with intimate personal care and felt this protected their dignity.
Staff training included the Mental Capacity Act 2005, and the provider’s policy reflected the principles of presuming capacity, supporting decision-making, making decisions in a person’s best interests when necessary and using the least restrictive option.