The Haven

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 has changed to 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.

People had lived at the home a long time. When their needs changed, a full assessment was carried out to ensure staff could continue to meet them. Assessments had been carried out in relation to people's health, social, sexual, spiritual and emotional needs. Staff worked closely with people’s relatives. A relative told us, “If there are any changes, they let us know, we have confidence in them.”

There were two bedrooms vacant. The registered manager told us there had been a lot of interest but that the right people were needed. They wanted to take it slowly to make sure that they could meet people’s needs, but their priority was to the people already living at the service to make sure they were happy with any new admissions to the home.

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.

People were in good health and rarely needed professional support but there were good systems in place to ensure that if advice and guidance was needed it was sought.

People’s care records stated their nutritional needs, dietary requirements, likes, dislikes and any allergies. The registered manager told us that strong emphasis had been placed on improving people’s diets and introducing a more varied menu. This had been successful with lots of new meals having been added to the menu. People were much more open to trying new foods. Training records showed staff had completed training courses to enable them support people appropriately with their nutritional needs.

A relative told us, “We used to get regular phone calls regarding [Person’s] diet. They made very good progress, they started liquidising vegetables, now they don’t have to do that. He has learned that there are certain foods he enjoys.” Another relative told us a staff member had been “Helping [Person] try new foods.” They told us the food was home cooked and, “There is evidence of [Staff member’s] good works in this area as [Person] has put on weight and looks healthy.”

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’s relatives told us they were kept informed about any events or changes in their family member’s health and felt confident staff sought professional input whenever it was needed.

A professional told us, “I have also been contacted by [Staff member] by email, with queries. [Staff member] has provided excellent documentation.” Another professional told us, “The [registered manager] was very welcoming and engaged well with us and the aims of the service.”

Staff gave us examples of how they worked effectively with a range of health and social care professionals to ensure people received coordinated and timely support. These included people’s GPs, hospital staff and when needed the community learning disability team.

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.

Staff supported people to attend all health appointments as needed. Regular appointments were arranged for people to attend dental, opticians and chiropody.

People were encouraged to make healthy choices. A staff member told us, “When I started working here [Person] only ate frozen foods now, he eats a wider variety of foods.” There was a booklet showing pictures of the meals prepared at the service. This helped people to make informed choices when deciding what they wanted to eat.

People were encouraged to walk and had opportunities to, swim and cycle to keep active and healthy.

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 knew people well and monitored them daily to identify changes in their health and well-being. Where appropriate, people’s weight was checked to identify if there was any unexpected weight loss or gain. Each person had an annual health review and as part of this process a check was made to ensure people had access to any other health provision as needed.

A health professional told us they had worked with the home to review practices in relation to managing particular medicines that had enabled a service user to achieve better seizure control.

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

There was advice and guidance within care plans about how people made choices. During our visits we observed staff asking permission before providing care. Capacity assessments were completed when needed and staff had received training and acted in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. A person’s relative had recently purchased a helmet for them for outdoor use. A capacity assessment had yet to be written. However, in all other cases when people lacked the capacity to make decisions staff had followed the principles of the mental capacity act to ensure decisions were made with those closest to them, were the least restrictive and, in their best interest.

Staff explained things to people in ways they understood, so they could make informed decisions about what they were consenting to. People were able to say if they wanted to participate in an activity or not and staff told us that sometimes people changed their mind and opted for different activities or different food choices. A health professional told us, “[Person’s] team have included him in the conversation and explained to him that we are going to discuss…].”