St Anne's Leeds Domiciliary Care 3 (DCA3)

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 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.

People’s needs were thoroughly and effectively assessed using a person‑centred approach. Comprehensive assessments were completed on admission and regularly reviewed, covering health, mental wellbeing, communication, daily living skills, behaviour, risks, and social needs. These assessments were detailed, up to date and reflective of each person’s history, preferences, strengths and areas where support was required.

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 and relatives consistently told us staff were skilled and well trained. Comments included, “The staff are all really good. They have so much patience” and “I think they are good. They help people like me. It doesn’t matter who you are they will help you. They include everyone.”

The provider was aware of and implemented the right support, right care, and right culture guidance. Staff completed ongoing training to keep their skills and knowledge current. The training also included the Oliver McGowan Mandatory Training on Learning Disability and Autism. One person using the service told us they had been involved in the training with the support of St Anne’s Leeds Domiciliary Care 3 (DCA3) staff.

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 and relatives described good communication with staff and managers, with concerns raised acted on appropriately. A relative said, “I have got emails and phone numbers for the managers. They are very prompt with their replies.

We saw evidence that care plans were person-centred, with people's preferences recorded. Relatives told us that they were encouraged to support their loved ones to participate in decisions about their care and support, promoting collaboration for their health and wellbeing.

The provider supported people to maintain their health and wellbeing in ways that promoted independence, choice and control. Staff encouraged people to adopt healthier lifestyles and, where possible, helped them reduce their future care and support needs.

Individual assessments and care plans clearly identified people’s physical health, mental health and lifestyle needs, with guidance for staff on how to support healthier choices and manage potential risks. People were supported to attend routine and specialist healthcare appointments, including GP visits, mental health services, dentistry, opticians and hospital appointments, ensuring timely access to treatment and monitoring of conditions.

Support promoted healthy eating and nutrition, with people encouraged to prepare meals, make shopping choices and develop cooking skills in line with their abilities. Staff provided support where needed while promoting independence, and risks such as alcohol intake were monitored with clear guidance in care plans.

People were also supported to remain active and socially engaged, taking part in community activities, employment, volunteering, sports and social groups, which contributed positively to both physical and mental wellbeing. A person told us how they had enjoyed playing rugby however, due to their age rather than stopping they took the role of coaching the team which still meant they were able to enjoy the sporting activities.

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.

The provider had effective systems in place to monitor people’s progress and improve outcomes. People’s outcomes were clearly identified within personalised care plans, with goals focused on increasing independence, wellbeing and quality of life. Progress was regularly monitored through care plan reviews and multidisciplinary involvement, ensuring outcomes remained relevant and achievable.

The provider demonstrated clear evidence of positive outcomes for people. For example, 1 person wanted to learn writing and reading skills. The staff supported them with this and now they were able to write and prepare their own shopping lists which previously they relied on staff to do. Another person had an outcome to work and had begun working for St Anne’s to develop their skills with the hope of finding full time employment. The person said, “I work for St Anne’s, I do interviews and the road shows. I am also doing the Oliver McGowan training. I’ve also got another paid job which is the Dapple project for Kingston university, that’s talking about end of life.”

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

The provider demonstrated effective application of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA), ensuring people’s rights and decision‑making abilities were appropriately assessed and respected. Capacity assessments were decision‑specific and clearly recorded, covering key areas such as finances, medication, care arrangements and sharing information. Assessments reflected the presumption of capacity and were completed where concerns had been identified.

Where people were assessed as lacking capacity, best‑interest decisions were correctly completed, involving the person, relatives or appointees and relevant professionals. These decisions were clearly documented, proportionate and kept under review, demonstrating good legal and ethical practice.

Care plans reflected the outcomes of capacity assessments, ensuring people were supported to make choices wherever possible. Some people were enabled to self‑administer medication or manage aspects of their daily living with agreed levels of staff oversight, promoting independence while managing risk safely.

Staff showed a good understanding of the MCA in practice, including the need to assess capacity, avoid blanket decisions and support individuals to participate in decisions about their care. A staff member said, “If we thought someone lacked capacity, we would do that through a capacity assessment; however, it should be assumed that people have capacity.”