Newlink Care Services

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 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. Assessments of people’s needs were carried out to ensure their care needs could be met. Expected outcomes for people’s care were identified and used to develop people’s care plans and ensure care and support was planned and continually provided in accordance with people’s needs. A relative told us, “[Person’s] assessment before moving in was a good process. We felt involved and listened to.”

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment. People were supported to eat, and drink based on their individual preferences and needs. Where people required support with eating and drinking, this was recorded in their care records. People's care plans also contained guidance on how to manage identified areas where they were at any potential risk and if they had any specific dietary requirements. A relative told us, “[Person] has [autoimmune disease] and staff manage their food. [Person] gets to choose what they eat and enjoys food.”

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.

Records showed staff had completed training the registered manager considered mandatory in areas such as safeguarding, infection control, moving and handling and first aid. Staff received formal supervision and appraisals to monitor and review staff performance. A staff member told us, “The management here are very supportive. We have regular and refresher training. Training is always ongoing. We have regular supervisions and talk about people, what’s going well, what we would like to achieve and our development.” Another staff member told us, “We get regular supervision. The manager assesses how things are going, what could be improved, what we should be doing, it is an open conversation.”

The competency of staff was assessed through spot checks. This involved staff being observed by management staff and assessing how staff carried out their duties. Any areas of improvement were identified and addressed by the registered manager. A healthcare professional told us, “I am very pleased with the carers’ skills and attitudes. Staff are open to feedback and demonstrate a good understanding of the individual they support.”

Processes were in place for information in relation to people’s needs and any changes with their care to be shared amongst staff. A staff member told us, “Before and after shifts, we have a handover form and verbally provide feedback to the next staff member on shift. We have a group chat on our phones and comments log we complete. We also have meetings every Monday to discuss everything about people’s needs and the service. We work very well together; it is not difficult to share information between us.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. People were supported to access healthcare services when required. A person told us, “Staff give me paracetamol if I don’t feel well and if I am still not well, they take me to the GP. I see a Mental Health nurse every few months and always take my medication. I am in a routine.”

Care plans contained information about people's health and medical needs and the support they required with maintaining good health. The service worked in partnership with other services and a range of health and social care professionals to ensure people’s health was maintained, such as a GP, Speech and Language Therapy (SALT), Mental Health, Psychologist, Psychiatry, Occupational Therapist, Dentist, Chiropodist and Community Learning Disabilities team (CLDT).

Care records detailed information about people’s appointments attended, their outcomes and any follow up if required providing effective oversight of people’s healthcare. A relative told us, “They support [person] with health appointments and make us aware of them. I go to some appointments with staff. Staff know [person] well and understand their funny ways. If [person] doesn’t want to do something they know how to encourage and bring them round.”

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. A relative told us, “[Person] is so much happier since moving in. I am not worried about their wellbeing.” The service ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. A healthcare professional told us, “[Person] is safe and well looked after. They have settled very well due to the consistent support provided by skilled and attentive staff. During the initial settling-in period, some issues were raised. However, these were addressed promptly, appropriately, and managed well by the service.”

The provider involved people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Effective systems and processes were in place to ensure the service acted in accordance with the provisions of Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and peoples’ best interests were protected. Where people had capacity, records showed the service obtained their consent about their care and support. Where people lacked capacity, mental capacity assessments had been undertaken and the best interest’s decision making process has been followed which included involving relatives and healthcare professionals.

Records showed the relevant processes were being followed in relation to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) as it was recognised that there were areas of the people’s care in which their liberties were being deprived in their best interests.

Records and feedback from people and relatives indicated people were not being restricted from leaving their supported living services and enjoyed various activities and community outings. In areas where a person was identified at being at risk when going out in the community, risk assessments were in place and if required for their best interests were supported by staff when they went out.

MCA and DoLS policies were in place and staff had received MCA training. Staff told us they sought people’s consent before and offered choice when supporting them with their care and treatment.