Walsingham Support - London Supported Living

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 provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. People’s needs were assessed in detail and we saw evidence they, and their families, were involved in developing and reviewing their care plans. Assessments were used to help create care plans which outlined people’s care and support needs, preferences and wishes and the support required by staff. Care plans were regularly reviewed to reflect any changes in people’s needs, wishes and health conditions.

People’s relatives told us they thought their needs were met and their choices were respected.

Care records included information about people’s communication needs and there was a detailed guide in their care plan which enabled staff to understand and communicate with the person effectively and meet their needs.

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 including CQC’s ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance. People’s care and support plans contained information about their personal likes and dislikes. People and their relatives were involved in review meetings.

Staff worked well together. Systems were in place to help promote effective communication. Members of staff attended regular handover and team meetings where information and updates about people were shared and discussed to ensure continuity and consistency of care and support. For example, information about upcoming appointments and social activities people had planned were discussed and members of staff were allocated to support people.

Staff told us they felt communication was good. A member of staff told us, “Communication is good here.” Another member of staff said, “Communication from management is brilliant.”

Staff told us they were supported in their work and felt valued working at the service. They spoke positively about communication between staff and felt comfortable reaching out to their colleagues and management for support.

Staff worked well with external healthcare professionals. They made timely referrals when they identified people had a specific need. Healthcare professionals told us that the service communicated with them well and kept them informed of any developments.

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 were encouraged to make healthier lifestyle choices and they were supported to eat more healthily whilst maintaining choice and control. People were supported to access local health and care services. People’s health and care needs were reviewed regularly.

Staff recorded their visits on daily notes. These recorded the tasks staff completed and people’s healthcare needs. Management used these notes to help monitor people’s progress.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Easy read documents were used to support people to give informed consent for care and support. People's capacity to make decisions was reviewed and recorded appropriately.

The previous inspection found that people did not always have appropriate authorisations in place to deprive people of their liberty. During this assessment, the registered manager explained that improvements had been made and confirmed that applications had been made to the Court of Protection to ensure necessary proportional safeguards were put in place and people were not unlawfully deprived of their liberty and decisions were made in people’s best interest.

Our previous inspection found that people’s tenancy agreements were unlawfully signed. During this assessment, the registered manager explained that each person had appointeeships in place and tenancy agreements were now signed by people’s representatives who had authority to do so.

Assessments had been carried out when people lacked the mental capacity to make certain decisions. These assessments included information about how choices were communicated and if the person needed extra support to understand decisions. People’s representatives were involved to help make decisions in their best interests when needed.

Management were aware of the importance of making decisions in people’s best interests and not imposing unnecessary restrictions on people.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. Easy read documents were used to support people to give informed consent for care and support. People's capacity to make decisions was reviewed and recorded appropriately.

The previous inspection found that people did not always have appropriate authorisations in place to deprive people of their liberty. During this assessment, the registered manager explained that improvements had been made and confirmed that applications had been made to the Court of Protection to ensure necessary proportional safeguards were put in place and people were not unlawfully deprived of their liberty and decisions were made in people’s best interest.

Our previous inspection found that people’s tenancy agreements were unlawfully signed. During this assessment, the registered manager explained that each person had appointeeships in place and tenancy agreements were now signed by people’s representatives who had authority to do so.

Assessments had been carried out when people lacked the mental capacity to make certain decisions. These assessments included information about how choices were communicated and if the person needed extra support to understand decisions. People’s representatives were involved to help make decisions in their best interests when needed.

Management were aware of the importance of making decisions in people’s best interests and not imposing unnecessary restrictions on people.