Cathrolls' UK 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. This is the first assessment for this newly 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 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 provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. The provider carried out assessments of people’s needs prior to their package of care and support starting. The assessments were then reviewed monthly. Staff told us they reported any changes to people’s care and support needs to the management team. A staff member said, “If anything changes, I call management. If I notice anything I let them know.” A relative told us “They are on the ball (with noticing issues/changes).”

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 were provided with care and support which met their needs and expectations. A person told us, “My priority is a shower and dress up and they support me with that and to comb my hair.” When people had support with preparing and cooking food, the food provided was purchased by relatives and cooked by staff. People were making food choices.

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 provider told us that they shared information about health concerns with relevant healthcare professionals and with relatives. They had also provided advice to people using the service and their families when they noticed areas of concern outside of their commissioned role. For example, providing advice about footcare to people. A person told us, “If I need anything extra, I ask, and they do it for me.” The staff team was small and worked well together. The nominated individual for the provider also provided care and support when required and knew people well. A member of staff told us, “I feel well supported, we work as a team, we get information about changes.”

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. Staff could tell us how they would access additional support from healthcare professionals to help people manage their health, should they be required. The management team gave us examples of when they had made contact with people’s GP or the district nursing service when people had suffered a reaction to prescribed medicines and when there had been problems with a person’s stoma. Records showed that staff had received training to support people with their specific health or lifelong conditions, such as stoma care and dementia. Records showed staff had not undertaken training in diabetes and oxygen therapy even though they supported people who had diabetes and who used oxygen. The management team advised they would address this. A relative told us, “If there is anything health wise they get it touch, they are brilliant."

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 carried out monthly telephone monitoring reviews of the service to check that people were happy with their care. We could see that adjustments had been made to care and support in relation to the feedback. There had been no complaints about the service. Compliments about the service were not recorded. People told us, “I have no problems with them” and “I have not really got any complaints. They are pretty good.”

Supervisions and spot checks had taken place frequently, staff were provided with an opportunity to discuss any concerns they may have about people’s care or how it could be improved. A member of staff told us, “I have regular spot checks and supervision. I may have 2 to 3 spot checks per month.”

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 MCA 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. We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA.

People told us they made choices and day to day decisions about their lives. A person told us, “They talk with me and guide me.” People’s care records evidenced that staff respected people’s choices and decisions. A staff member said, “Everyone we support has capacity and can make their own choices.”