Park View

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 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 service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

Risk assessments were robust and detailed the support people required to safely manage their health and wellbeing. For example, in relation to epilepsy, mobilisation, nutrition and hydration. Guidance included early signs of how to recognise declining health and the action to be taken. This meant people had timely access to the right support and enabled them to remain safe. A professional working with the service told us, “Staff are familiar with individual clinical needs, physical abilities, risks and personal preferences”.

The service 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 had access to relevant medical professionals, who told us the service worked collaboratively with them, this supported positive outcomes for people.

The service 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.

People's goals and inspirations were detailed in their support plan; we saw staff support people with a consistent approach and provide person led support. The staff collaborated and enabled people to take part in meaningful activities and increase their access to the community, for example people were supported to attend night clubs, activity parks and holidays. This contributed to a better quality of life.

The service 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.

Some people using the service had multiple health needs. Information about people’s health needs and how these should be managed was clearly documented in people’s support plans. For example, a person’s epilepsy care plan provided staff with detailed information to identify pre-seizure signs, types of seizures and actions for staff to take. Staff kept clear records of any visits or correspondence with healthcare professionals, which documented the reasons for the visit, actions and the outcome. This helped to ensure that medical advice was followed.

The service 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 themselves.

People’s life experiences, skills and strengths were discussed with them on a regular basis. This approach enabled people to understand the steps needed to achieve their goals and take ownership. Support plans focused on what people could do, rather than on perceived barriers, which helped maintain both physical and mental wellbeing. This led to increased self-confidence, greater independence, and an improved quality of life.

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

Staff followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The 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 Act 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 decisions made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. We found assessments of people's capacity had been completed when needed. Records showed where people lacked capacity, decisions made on their behalf were made in line with the MCA.

People and their families told us that staff sought consent before providing care or support.