Unisus Group Limited

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 variable, which was reflected in the mixed feedback we received.

This service scored 63 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People’s care needs were assessed before they commenced with the service, and this information was used to develop person‑centred care plans to guide staff on the support required.

People and relatives were generally positive about their initial involvement in care planning and described detailed assessments, with opportunities to discuss individual needs and preferences. However, some feedback indicated care delivery did not always align with people’s care plans over time, particularly where there were frequent changes in staff supporting people. A relative told us, “[Staff] came out to do the assessment, and he was lovely. Very compassionate and caring. When the care was set up it was brilliant, but within a month it had gone downhill very rapidly, and it seems to be because the long-term experienced staff left during that time.”

Care and support was not always delivered in line with best practice or met people’s needs. People and relatives told us some staff lacked the knowledge and skills required to support safe care. One relative told us, “One carer didn't know how to make a cup of tea, didn't know what a fridge was or what milk was. They have also given my [relative] microwave meals which were still frozen in the middle. I don't want them getting food poisoning.”

These issues, combined with the impact of missed and late calls, meant people could not rely on the service to meet their essential care needs at the right time or in a safe manner.

Despite these concerns, some positive practice was also evidenced. People’s nutritional and hydration needs were recorded within care plans, and where experienced staff were involved, support was delivered appropriately. A member of staff told us, “We monitor our clients nutritional and fluid intake via our app and read notes from previous carers to ensure our clients maintain a good diet and stay hydrated. We notify management of any concerns regarding this promptly.”

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 worked effectively across teams and with external health and social care professionals to support people and ensure their needs were met. Information about people’s needs was shared appropriately to promote continuity of care and reduce the need for people to repeat their information. Assessments and care plans were used to inform staff involved in people’s care, and relevant updates were shared when people’s needs changed. A professional told us, “The visit included discussions relating to joint working, during a transition period for a client. The visit went well and both my colleague and I were happy with the arrangements of support for stafffrom management.”

People’s experiences showed support was not always delivered in a timely or effective way. Concerns were raised about late and missed calls, which meant people did not always receive their care at the right time. These delays sometimes caused distress and prevented people from maintaining healthy routines.

There were also concerns about staff knowledge and skills. People and relatives reported that some staff lacked the training and confidence needed to provide safe and appropriate care. This inconsistency in skills meant people’s assessed needs were not always met.

Daily records were used to share information between staff, and the service worked with health and social care professionals when required. Care plans were reviewed regularly, but ongoing staffing issues and gaps in staff knowledge limited the effectiveness of this approach, and people did not always receive the support they needed to maintain or improve their health and wellbeing.

Whilst the provider monitored people’s care and support; this monitoring was not always effective in identifying or addressing concerns such as late or missed calls, inconsistencies in care delivery, or gaps in staff knowledge. People’s experiences showed that outcomes were not always positive or consistent, and some individuals did not receive care at the times or in the way that had been planned.

People and their representatives were involved in planning their care, and care plans were regularly reviewed and updated. Daily records were maintained to monitor individuals’ wellbeing, although these systems did not always lead to timely action when issues arose, particularly where concerns related to punctuality, continuity of staff or care issues.

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

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the MCA. When people receive care and treatment in their own homes an application must be made to the Court of Protection for them to authorise people to be deprived of their liberty.

The provider had systems in place to ensure the service was working within the principles of The Mental Capacity Act. Staff had received training in this area.

Staff told us how they involved people in planning their care. A staff member told us, “People are supported to make choices and decisions about their own care from the very start. Clients have an initial assessment and a This Is Me form filled out. This ensures choice and being able to make decisions for the client when it comes to their care.”