Archived: Personal Assist South Yorkshire Also known as 1-5103752706

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 changed to requires improvement. This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.

This service scored 54 (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 did not always make sure people’s care and treatment were effective because they did not always check and discuss people’s health, care, and wellbeing needs with them. People had their needs assessed prior to receiving support from the service. However, care records required some improvements, to ensure they contained enough information about people's needs and diagnoses. People had care plans relating to managing incidents of distress, although these required more robust information. People's sensory needs were detailed in their care records, for example, 1 person liked to take sensory toys on outings and enjoyed having a massage. People's religious and cultural needs were assessed and people's likes, dislikes and what was important to them were contained in their records.

The provider did not always plan and deliver people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. Care plans required some improvements to ensure they contained information relating to external professionals’ input and advice. We found some people's records lacked speech and language therapist (SALT) information, about how staff managed people's foods and fluids to reduce their risks of choking.

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 worked with external professionals to meet people's needs. Records evidenced staff worked with emergency services and stayed with people until help arrived. Staff worked with health services, such as opticians, dentists and social workers. A relative said, “Staff work with me, the occupational therapist and nurses.”

The provider did not always support people to manage their health and wellbeing, so people could not always maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff did not always support people to live healthier lives, or where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. People had access to healthcare services and people were supported to exercise, such as swimming, walking and sports. People were supported to eat and drink, and records evidenced people were offered a choice of meals. People told us staff supported them to attend health appointments. Comments included, “One time I rang I had an appointment. They came early and took me to my appointment” and “They are flexible. They will accompany [name] to appointments even at short notice.” However, due to concerns regarding care records, we could not be assured people received support in line with their assessed needs.

The provider did not always routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They did not always ensure that outcomes were positive and consistent, or that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. Care records did not always contain enough detail about how people were working towards future goals and aspirations. However, we found people's wishes and what was important to them was contained in their care plans and people were supported to do things which were meaningful to them.

The provider did not always tell people about their rights around consent and did not always respect their rights when delivering care and treatment. Staff understood their responsibilities to gain consent from people. A staff member said, “I engage people in their care, giving them choices, getting consent before doing anything for them. If I want to know whether they like me to support them with personal care or medication, I would first seek their consent.” However, staff did not always work in line with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). Staff lacked MCA training and where people lacked capacity to make certain decisions, assessments were not in place to assess this.