Alchita Care Limited of Bradford

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 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. The service was no longer in breach of regulation relating to consent to care and treatment.

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

The service completed initial assessment information, detailing person-centred information in relation to the person health, care, wellbeing and communication. The service provided evidence these assessments were completed with people or their relatives. People told us they were fully involved in care planning and reviews. One relative told us, “[the service] came to see me, and we went through a lot; really about what we wanted, we went through everything together to see if we were in agreement and we were.”

The service 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.

The service planned and delivered peoples care and treatment with them. Staff had completed relevant training to have evidence-based knowledge to ensure best practice. Leaders of the service ensured staff were given additional training where needed, to support new people using the service. They followed relevant legislation such as MCA, 2005, to ensure practice was evidence based. People told us they were supported with aspects of care which were important to them. One relative told us, “They [staff] do everything for [my relative] that they can; they make [my relative] cups of tea before they leave. They make sure [my relative] is tucked up in bed, and [my relative] is warm and cosy.”

The service 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.

The service completed initial assessments and care plans with people and supported this information to be as thorough as possible, avoiding the need for people to tell their story more than once. The service worked well with other agencies. One professional told us, “[the service] have consistently made themselves available for joint visits.” Staff also told us the staff team works well together and there is good communication between leaders and staff. People shared similar experiences around continuity of support. One relative told us, “[the service] go out of their way to provide the same staff, if one [staff member] is away, then the other will cover. If they [staff] need to provide another career due to holiday, it is usually the same one.”

The service 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.

The service supported people to complete tasks for themselves where possible to mitigate for future care and support needs. The services statement of purpose advised they strive to support people with community activities; however, there was no evidence of signposting to relevant community services. The service has advised us how they will make improvements in this area. Staff advised us they support people to eat healthy food, and to complete exercises. One staff member told us, “[person using the service] is in bed all the time, we encourage them to do leg exercises.” People told us they are supported to live healthier lives. One relative told us, “The carers support [my relative] to eat healthy.”

The service did not always routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They did not always ensure outcomes were positive and consistent, and they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

The service had robust systems in place to monitor and improve outcomes for people. Leaders in the service completed regular audits and spot checks to ensure a high standard of care, and identify any improvements needed. Reviews were completed with people to discuss their needs; however, these were not always recorded consistently. The service did not always ensure follow up actions were recorded, for example, when contacting the local general practice to escalate concerns. The service has advised us how they will make improvements on this. Staff told us there is good communication between them and leaders when changes are needed to be made to people’s care. One staff member told us, “We are kept up to date, and we tell leaders as well if we feel there are any changes needed.” People told us their care was regularly reviewed to monitor and improve their outcomes. One relative told us, “[senior staff] come out every 2 weeks or so and will review things then, they [the service] ask if all is ok and if there are any problems. Really the review of care is ongoing.”

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

The service had robust systems and knowledge in place regarding consent. Relevant consent documentation was in place for people. A covert medication and consent policy in place. Staff provided a good understanding of relevant legislation and how it was relevant to their role, for example, one staff member told us, “We [staff] follow the 5 principles of the MCA, 2005 and take all practicable steps to support people to make their own decisions.” Staff also displayed a good understanding around consent, and how this applied to their role. People told us they were asked consent before care was provided to them. One relative told us, “They [staff] will always ask [my relative] if it is ok before they do anything.”