St Martha's

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 did not assess enough quality statements to rate this key question. At this assessment the service 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.

People participated in their assessments and reviews. People had communication care plans in place and documents to take to hospital with them when required. Staff and those who knew people well were also involved in people’s assessments to ensure their views and opinions were captured.

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.

Staff monitored people’s weight if required and used nationally recognised tools appropriately to assess and monitor people’s needs. For example, they used the National Early Warning Score 2 (NEWS2) tool which is the latest version of the NEWS tool, which advocates a system to standardise the assessment and response to acute illness. We saw this had enabled staff to request appropriate medical assistance when they had identified people were becoming unwell.

Staff ensured people had enough to eat and drink and where there were any concerns in this area, staff had put safeguards in place to support people to manage these.

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.

The staff team worked together with a variety of health and social care professionals to ensure care and support was received when required. The provider had processes in place to ensure care and support was coordinated in the best interests of people using the service, which included collaboration with professionals, and information sharing.

The registered manager gave us several examples of how staff worked with other health professionals to ensure positive outcomes for people.

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.

Care records captured the support people required with their health needs and what action staff should take when there was any deterioration to an individual’s health. Staff told us they worked with the mental health team, social workers, GP, and families.

The service had their own gym with regularly assessed and maintained gym equipment and their own dedicated physical training instructor. This meant people were supported to use the equipment in the right way and could use the equipment in the knowledge it was safe. People also had access to a range of other activities to further support their mental and physical wellbeing.

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.

Staff worked collaboratively to plan and deliver people’s care, reduce risks, and achieve best outcomes for them. The did this through regular reviews which took place involving people, and where appropriate their relatives. One relative told us, “I trust the staff. I do not see many agency workers here and the staff know my relative well.”

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. People told us they were involved in decisions about their care and treatment and records confirmed this.

Where necessary, mental capacity assessments were completed in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and where a person was deemed to lack capacity a best interest meeting was held with the person, their relative, and relevant others to support positive least restrictive decision making. These were recorded in good detail an demonstrated how people were supported in different ways to give them the best opportunity to understand and contribute to decisions about their care.