Washwood Healthcare Service

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 as 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 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 provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

The care plans included people’s health, care, wellbeing and communication needs. People and their relatives were confident that individual needs had been appropriately assessed. People told us they had discussed their support needs with staff. We saw in care plans and risk assessments, family members had also been given opportunities to engage in the assessment and ongoing assessment processes. A professional told us, “I go through [person’s] care plan thoroughly with them and with the staff and they are quick to deal with any queries.”

The registered manager explained care plans and risk assessments were reviewed regularly or when people’s needs had changed. The registered manager told us if a person was admitted to hospital, they would visit and complete a new assessment of the person’s needs. This was to make sure once the person was ready for discharge the service can continue to meet that person’s needs.

We found care plans had been reviewed and updated in accordance with any changes to people’s health condition or a change in their personal circumstances. Daily care notes were completed by staff. Clinical assessment tools were used, where necessary, for example, weight loss records and food charts to monitor unexplained weight loss. We saw appropriate referrals had been made to the GP, Speech and Language Therapist and dietician.

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 at risk of developing sore skin had a completed Waterlow assessment tool identifying the level of risk posed to them. The Waterlow assessment isa nationally recognised tool used pressure ulcer risk assessment tool, which helps healthcare providers identify individuals at risk of developing pressure ulcers by scoring various risk factors like body build, skin condition, mobility, and continence.The total score indicates the level of risk.

Records we looked at were person-centred and contained detailed information about people’s nutrition and hydration needs, including monitoring of all risks and health related conditions. Where any deterioration had been identified, referrals had been made to the appropriate agencies, for example, the mental health team.

Some people had regular input from visiting health care professionals. Staff told us they had updates about people’s health and support needs through team meetings, supervision and/or spot checks.

We could see from people’s care plans and discussions with professionals, referrals had been made for advocacy for people who had no immediate family support. An advocate is someone who will represent the person’s views and be their voice in decisions about their care and support.

Everyone we spoke with told us the provider and their staff delivered good care and support to them.

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 were positive about their working relationships with the provider, family members and the people they supported. One staff member told us, “I like the team working here and love the residents. If we have any problems, we’ve got good management and they’re really supportive.”

The service used an electronic care planning system to record day to day activities and the support people received from staff. All staff we spoke with accessed the information they needed about a person’s care through the provider’s ‘hand-held’ device. This is a mobile device or laptop that can be accessed by staff when completing their daily tasks.

Family members were kept up to date about ongoing health or care arrangements in respect of their loved ones.

People and relatives told us communication with the provider and their staff was good and they felt comfortable in raising any concerns or issues as they arose. One person said, “I don’t have a lot to do with [registered manager], but he’ll always pop in every morning to ask if everything’s alright. He has told me to tell him about any issues I have.”

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 told us how they worked with people and their family to support people’s health, social and emotional wellbeing. We saw people were encouraged and supported to access facilities within the community, such as shopping, going for walks and attending a local church. One person said how much they enjoyed visiting the local shopping centre each week.

We also saw how some people were receiving support from the provider and health professionals to manage their weight which had seen successful results for people.

Healthy options were available at mealtimes for people. Meals were fortified for those at risk of losing weight. A fortified meal has a higher number of calories to help increase the weight for those at high risk. People living with diabetes received guidance and support on how to eat a healthy diet to support the management of their medical condition.

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.

People and relatives told us the registered manager or senior staff met with them to discuss their care and support to make sure care plans were relevant and being followed.

For people who were not always able to verbalise their choices, staff explained how they engaged with them to understand their needs and support. One staff member told us, “[Person] may not be able to tell us what they want, but we know. We can tell by how [person] is on the day if they are happy or upset, today is a good day for them.” We could see there were positive interactions between people and the staff.

The provider and their staff supported people with their daily lives to maintain their health and wellbeing. This included supporting some people through their service to eventually leave and move into their own homes. The staff encouraged people to engage with group activities that would develop skills to support their independence, such as cooking, laundry and domestic responsibilities.

Care plans referenced monitoring healthcare needs which were reviewed regularly by staff. There were easy read and picture documents available to explain annual health checks such as vaccinations and medical checks.

People and relatives told us the staff that supported them to understood their care and support needs and their input had helped to maintain their independence and achieved positive outcomes. This had included supporting 2 people to access advocacy support.

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

Care plans considered people’s capacity and their ability to consent to their care and make decisions about the support needed. This meant the service worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). Staff had completed their mental capacity training and understood the importance of gaining consent from people and encouraging people to make their own decisions about their care and support. One staff member said, “MCA is the law that protects and supports people who may lack the ability to make their own decisions. We make sure residents are treated fairly and in their best interests.” Another staff member explained, “DoLS (Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards) allows representation and is a mechanism of challenging a decision to restrict someone who lacks the mental capacity to consent to their care like living in a care home.”

People and their relatives felt their views and wishes had been considered when care and support was being planned. People told us staff always sought their consent before delivering care.

We saw staff consistently sought people’s consent before engaging in any activity with them. They offered people choices at mealtimes, and choices of drinks and snacks between meals. At mealtime, we saw people who could not always verbalise their choice were shown plated options of the meals available which supported them to make their own decision in what they wanted to eat.