Support Care Services

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 71 (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. Assessments of people’s needs were carried out before they used the service to ensure their care needs could be met. People and relatives were involved in the assessments to enable them to make an informed choice about their care. Expected outcomes for people’s care were identified and used to develop people’s care plans and ensure care and support was planned and continually provided in accordance with people’s needs. A relative told us, “[Registered manager] sat down with us at the start and made sure every aspect of [person’s] care was considered. They listened to me and [person] and made sure that we were both happy with all the arrangements.” Another relative told us, “We developed a care plan initially with [registered manager]. They visited several times at the start to make sure everything was covered and [person] is getting the best care.”

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. People were supported to eat, and drink based on their individual preferences and needs. Where people required support with eating and drinking, this was recorded in their care records. People's care plans also contained information on how to manage identified areas where they were at potential risk of poor nutrition or had swallowing difficulties. A relative told us, “They [staff] know how to prepare [person’s] food because of their difficulty with swallowing. The carers understand [person] so well, they are often recommending things to us to buy that they think [person] will like and be able to eat.” Another relative told us, “They [staff] make sure that [person] has full choice of what food and drinks they have and they will prepare whatever [person] asks for. There have been no complaints about the standard of meals.”

The provider did not always work well across teams and services to support people. Processes were in place for information in relation to people’s needs and any changes with their care to be shared amongst staff. The service used an electronic call monitoring system (ECM) to record staff attendance times and support provided to people during each visit to ensure people received their care visits as planned. However, there were instances of calls not being managed well and ECM records not effectively monitored by the provider.

People and relatives told us staff were on time and people had regular carers which ensured consistency with people’s care. A person told us, “She [staff member] is never late and never makes me feel rushed.” A relative told us, “There are 2 regular carers, this stability and continuity really helps and [person] looks forward to them coming. The carers are timely, efficient and never rush off, always finding time for a chat and a laugh with [person]. I think the fact that we have stable, consistent carers really helps with understanding, recognition and trust.”

People and relatives spoke positively about staff and felt they fully understood people’s care needs. A relative told us, “I cannot speak highly enough about the carers because they appear to be appropriately trained, experienced, knowledgeable and practical.” Another relative told us, “The staff have been amazing and appear to fully understand how to care for people who have dementia. As they have been so relaxed with their approach, their care has been very effective.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing. People were supported to access healthcare services when required. The provider worked in partnership with other services such as the GP and pharmacy to deliver effective and timely care. A relative told us, “If there is an emergency they [staff] would deal with it. Otherwise, if they [staff] think [person] needs to see a doctor, they will contact us and ask us to arrange it.”

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment. Care records detailed people’s goals and outcomes they wished to achieve. Daily notes were completed by staff. These enabled staff to monitor people and help staff respond to people’s changing needs promptly to help promote positive outcomes. A relative told us, “If the carers think they need to try something different, they will discuss it with me and suggest alternative options. If I have anything to ask them, they are very receptive and will always listen and discuss.”

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering care. Processes were in place to ensure the service acted in accordance with the provisions of Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and peoples’ best interests were protected. Where people had capacity, records showed the service obtained their consent about their care and support. Where people lacked capacity, their mental capacity had been assessed and the best interest’s decision making process has been followed which included involving relatives and healthcare professionals. A relative told us, “They respond totally to [persons] wishes and never do anything unless they consent to it.”

Care records had been signed by people or where appropriate, their family representatives to indicate that they had consented to their care. MCA and DoLS policies were in place and staff had received MCA training. Staff told us they sought people’s consent before and offered choice when supporting them with their care and treatment. A person told us, “[Staff member] does always check that I am happy to go ahead each day and would change things if I am not happy.” A relative told us, “Everything they do for [person] is done only with their consent and although encouraged, [person] is never forced to do anything.”