7 Eworth Close

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 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.

Some relatives told us they could not remember the assessment process due to the length of time passed, although felt the service was effectively meeting their family member’s needs. One relative commented, “A lot of time was spent finding the most appropriate place for my relative to make sure [relative] was happy, safe and fully supported.”

One person had recently moved into the service. The manager explained how they had facilitated visits for the person to meet the other people who lived at the service and to ease the transition. The manager explained how they waited until they found the right person to move to the service in relation to other people’s needs. They commented, “We were trying to find the right fit for the home, a few people came to visit but they wouldn’t have fitted in with the needs of the other people. It is important to find the right balance.”
 

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.

Relatives told us people’s care plans reflected their needs. People’s care was regularly reviewed to ensure it remained up to date. One relative commented, “[The care plan reviews] are ongoing, it is a two-way conversation between us and the staff”.

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 told us they worked well together as a team. One staff member commented, “It’s a lovely place to work, everyone helps everyone”. Staff told us there were regular team meetings and that staff contributed to these and shared new suggestions of ways of working.

One professional told us the service worked well with them. They told us the staff facilitated person-centred one-to-one activity sessions with people living at the service. This enabled people to achieve positive outcomes.

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 had good information in their care plans to help staff support them to be healthy. For example, information about health checks, dental appointments and eye tests. We saw staff worked with one person to support them to achieve a healthier weight. Relatives told us the service was quick to identify and escalate any health concerns and felt staff encouraged people to be healthy. One relative told us they felt more vegetables were needed on the weekly menu, we fed this back to the manager.

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.

People had information in their care plans where certain aspects of care needed to be monitored. This helped guide staff to support people effectively. Staff knew people well and this helped people achieve positive outcomes. For example, one person was supported to achieve a more healthy weight. Another person was supported to meet their favourite musician, which had a positive impact on the person’s wellbeing.

The provider did not always ensure they worked in line with the Mental Capacity Act.

Although the manager had assessed people’s mental capacity for various aspects of their care, they had not always completed a best interest decision to show the outcome of the assessment and the decision which had been made. We raised this with the manager who told us they were aware of this shortfall and were actively working to address this.

However, staff asked for people’s consent before supporting them. We saw people’s rights were upheld and choices were respected.