Isabella’s Home Ltd

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.

This is the first assessment for this registered service.

This key question has been rated 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.

Care plans and risk assessments were developed alongside external professionals, people, and those important to them. People’s care was regularly reviewed to ensure it was up-to-date, and when changes to care plans had been made, staff were notified of these changes and asked to view the electronic records to ensure they have read and understood the changes.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them.

People experienced aspects of ‘Right support, right care and right culture’ guidance. For example: staff promoted people’s dignity choice and independence, and care was planned around people’s needs. Staff adapted communication approaches to support people to express their wishes and reduce stress and anxiety.

The provider worked closely with people to promote their independence with the aim of encouraging people to access the community as part of their lifestyle. Staff tracked and shared people’s progress and outcomes in ways which celebrated people’s success.

Staff had completed learning disability and autism training; however, we found not all staff had completed recent refresher training in these areas.

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.

One person told us the staff would contact the doctor for them if they felt unwell.

Staff worked well together, this included sharing information about people through daily notes, weekly emails, handovers and attending staff meetings, where people’s needs were discussed. There was a system in place to ensure the staff team worked together and alongside other professionals to deliver care to people. When transferring into and out of the service, discussions were held with relevant health professionals to ensure effective continuity of care.

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.

People’s health needs were identified, assessed and reviewed with them. The provider then implemented plans to support people in achieving their goals. One person told us of the impact staff support had on them saying, “I have not had a cigarette for 7 days.”

The provider made referrals to external health professionals where people needed specific specialist care.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent.

There were systems in place to ensure people’s needs were identified, assessed and reviewed to ensure positive outcomes were achieved for people. For example, the staff used an electronic tool to monitor and document health related needs, such as recommendations from the dentist, opticians and other forms of routine medical reviews, such as annual health checks and smear tests. Staff confirmed they were aware of people’s assessed needs and how they delivered support in-line with this.

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

The provider demonstrated regard for the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Mental capacity assessments and, where required, best interest decisions were in place for people who lacked the mental capacity to be able to make decisions regarding their care. Staff had received training in this area and were aware of the processes to follow

Where people with the mental capacity to be able to consent to restrictions had done so, such arrangements had not been reviewed with people to ensure they were clear about the restriction and discuss whether they remain willing to consent to them. For example, one person told us they did not feel comfortable with the use of CCTV in their home. While this arrangement had been detailed within their tenancy agreement from the landlord, this had not been fully explored nor reviewed with them. After discussing this with the provider, they stated they would review this with the landlord to seek changes to this arrangement where possible where this was affecting people.