Bryony Lodge

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 service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing, and communication needs with them. Staff understood people’s individual needs and made sure assessments were up to date and recorded. Staff told us people’s views were sought by using their preferred communication methods across various platforms including, during daily support and in meetings with their keyworker. One staff member told us, “We are taught how to have a different approach with people who can and cannot communicate verbally. For people who cannot communicate verbally we need to observe them, to look at their body language, are they comfortable and what signs to look out for which would indicate they were not comfortable.”

The service 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 manager told us how they used evidence based tools which supported staff to recognise if a person’s health was deteriorating. For example, the Waterlow score was used to assess a person’s risk of developing pressure ulcers. Staff ensured people had enough to eat and drink and where there was a concern in this area a person had a care plan in place with guidance from speech and language therapists (SALT) on how to support the person safely.

The service worked well across teams and services to support people. For example, staff worked with speech and language therapists,occupational therapists, district nurses and social workers. The manager shared with us an example of a person who required support with more complex clinical tasks and how they had sought additional support to ensure staff were competent and confident to provide this support. One professional told us, “I was very impressed with the provider in terms of the high level of due diligence they undertook before accepting my client. The provider had to liaise with health services in terms of obtaining robust assurance that my client’s long term health needs would be effectively met once placement commenced. I supported this as well, but the provider put considerable efforts in and had to deal with some challenges with the process.”

The service supported people to manage their health and well-being to maximise their independence, choice, and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.Staff members were able to give us examples of when they had worked with a range of different healthcare professionals to meet people’s needs. Staff told us they felt suitably skilled to recognise and respond to changes in a person’s mood or mental well-being. They told us this comes from knowing the person and reading their care plans. If they had any concerns about a person, they would report this to the manager. We reviewed menus and observed people were offered a range of healthy meal options. The manager told us, “We sit down and discuss the menus to help people choose healthy options and snacks.”

The service told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. We reviewed mental capacity assessments (MCAs) which were completed in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. We could see how the person had been involved in the assessment and how the provider had supported the person to understand the decision. Deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS) were in place for people who had restrictions included in their care plans. A DoLS tracker was in place to ensure the provider knew when these needed to be reapplied for. Staff described to us how they sought consent throughout the day to day tasks they supported people with.

The service told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. We reviewed mental capacity assessments (MCAs) which were completed in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. We could see how the person had been involved in the assessment and how the provider had supported the person to understand the decision. Deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS) were in place for people who had restrictions included in their care plans. A DoLS tracker was in place to ensure the provider knew when these needed to be reapplied for. Staff described to us how they sought consent throughout the day to day tasks they supported people with.