Kitnocks House

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 67 (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.

People had communication care plans in place and documents to take to hospital with them when required. Staff told us they were kept informed of changes made to care plans, so they always had the most up to date information. However, some care plans did contain some discrepancies which had not been picked up on review. The registered manager told us a new deputy had been appointed, and additional checks would be put in place to review care plans more regularly. A relative told us they were recently involved in a review of their loved one’s care.

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.

Universally recognised tools were used to continually assess people’s needs, such as relating to skin health and nutrition and provided a good standard of assessment. However, fluid was either not always given or not always recorded in line with people’s required target fluid intake. For example, records showed for 1 person, over a 2-week period, there were 4 days when they had not been offered 1500ml of fluid in line with their care plan. We spoke with the registered manager about this; they told us this would be included in the additional checks being put in place.

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.

People had a hospital pack which could be printed out and used when they were accessing hospital services. The registered manager told us, “People have an escort to go into hospital, and the staff member stays with them until admitted to a ward.” This meant people’s needs could be communicated to hospital staff and people had a familiar face with them during the transition period. People’s goals, dreams, and aspirations were communicated so a consistent approach was maintained between services.

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.

The provider had their own Occupational Therapist who visited to support people as required. People and their relatives told us the food was very good, and we observed people were provided with nutritionally balanced food that was well presented. People were supported to see medical professionals when required. Care records detailed what action staff should take if there was a deterioration in people’s health.

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 worked collaboratively to plan and deliver people’s care, reduce risks, and achieve best outcomes for them. One relative told us, “Staff when I visit are always warm and friendly to me, and they know my relative well and their care needs.”

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

Where necessary, mental capacity assessments were mostly completed in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and where a person was deemed to lack capacity, a best interest meeting was held. They mostly consulted the person, their relative and relevant others to support positive least restrictive decision making. However, best interest meetings did not always adequately document the views of those consulted. The registered manager told us they would include this going forward.