Nottz Care

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 with them. Care plans reflected people’s involvement and provided guidance on delivering care in line with their preferences.People’s needs were fully assessed and reviewed. Records showed the registered manager would contact all new people using the service after 6 weeks of care to check their needs were being met and there after people were contacted regularly by office staff to assess their needs. One person told us, “Care needs are reviewed, and we receive a phone call every 2 -3 months and a face to face review every 6 months.” Another person told us, “The manager reviews my care and contacts me.” This meant staff always had accurate guidance in place to support people with their assessed 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. The registered manager kept up to date with best practice guidance. They had signed up to an external agency who provided them with all legislation updates and supported them to put these changes into practice. People’s nutrition and hydration needs were effectively assessed, planned and supported. People lived in their own homes and made their own choices regarding food and drink. These choices and preferences were documented in people’s records. A person told us, “They make sure I have nice food and plenty to drink.” A relative told us, “Food and drinks are prepared for [family member] and she has choices, and they prepare what she likes and enjoys.” This meant people received effective care to meet their needs in line with best practice guidance.

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. Systems and processes were in place to support information sharing with relevant health professionals when needed. We found where specialist input was required their guidance had been included within people’s care plans. For example, a person had a district nurse involved to change bandages on their legs and required them to stay dry during personal care. This detail was included in the persons care plan. Relatives told us Nottz Care worked well with other health professionals. One relative told, “The company [Nottz care] provide a very holistic approach to [family member] care as they [staff] liaise with her health professionals. This is very reassuring as it provides consistent care that is reviewed for [family member].” This meant people received effective support with services working together. Staff told us they worked together well. One staff member said, “valuing each other’s contribution, consistent communication, fostering mutual trust and respect, establishing a clear goal, regular training and team meetings, promoting a supportive environment and leadership.”

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. Records showed staff worked with other health professionals to ensure people’s health needs were met and their well-being maintained. People told us staff supported them to attend health appointments. One person told us, “The carers accompany me to medical appointments as I need someone with me.” Another person told us, “The carers do understand my mental health needs and allow me to make decisions on my own.” A relative told us, “If [family member] is having a mental health episode the carers have phoned the GP and informed me.” People were supported to access the community. One person told us, “I have a push wheelchair and an electric one, so the carers take me using the electric chair to go out and about locally which is good for me to go into the community.” This meant people were supported with their health and 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. People told us that someone from the office came to them regularly to review their care plans. Records showed relatives were included in reviews of care where appropriate and where concerns were identified action was taken. Care plans were updated if changes had occurred in a timely manner. This meant staff had accurate information to support people effectively. The registered manager reviewed people’s care and monitored changes to ensure people had positive outcomes. For example, the registered manager had contacted the local authority for a re assessment for one person’s needs because they felt they were not safe living on their own at home due to safety concerns.

The provider did not always follow the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The MCA requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to make decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. We found mental capacity assessments had been completed; however, we found they did not always follow the five 5 key principles to prove someone lacks capacity. This meant people were at risk of having decisions made unlawfully. The manager told us they had acted after our visit and changed the record they used to include the 5 key principles.

The provider had told people who were deemed to have capacity about their rights around consent. Staff were able to explain consent to care. One staff member told us, “Consent means respecting a person’s rights and choices. I gain consent by asking clearly before doing anything and making sure they are comfortable. If someone cannot give consent, I would follow the correct process and involve their next of kin or Power of Attorney.” People told us consent was obtained before staff supported them, one person told us, “They always ask for consent, for example, shall we open the curtains for you, are you ready for a shower.” A relative told us,” They[staff] are very respectful and will inform [family member] what they are going to do next and ask her for consent.”