My Homecare Barnet

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating remained requires improvement. This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.

The provider was also in breach of legal regulations in relation to promoting safe care to people.

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, wellbeing and communication needs fully with them.

The provider had assessed a person’s needs, but they had not explored the risks sufficiently to ensure the risks were fully understood and staff had clear direction as to how to manage these risks, and what they must do if something went wrong.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them.

The provider planned the delivery of care after speaking with the person and their relative.

The provider did not always work well across teams and services to support people. They did not always share their assessment of people’s needs when people moved between different services.

The provider had not ensured they had fully explored a person’s needs this was reflected in the quality of the person’s risk assessments and care plans. The staff member who supported them was not aware and understood these needs and associated risks.

.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.

The provider had not clarified a person’s health needs and then made the necessary plans for staff to follow. A person had particular health needs, but their care plan lacked details regarding this. We were not confident the member of staff and the provider were prepared to respond to a person’s health needs if this was required.

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.

The provider had not been monitoring the care and treatment the person received, to check if further input was required. The member of staff was not receiving clear direction to monitor a person’s health needs and what they needed to do if something went wrong.

The provider did not always tell people about their rights around consent and they did not always respect their rights when delivering care and treatment.

The provider had failed to make it clear in writing to the person they had consented to the care arranged. They had also not informed the person and sought their consent to potentially share their personal information with other agencies such as professionals and us and in what circumstances they would do this.