Archived: 23 Pierrepoint Road

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 his assessment, the rating has changed to requires improvement. This meant the effectiveness of people’s care, treatment and support did not always achieve good outcomes or was inconsistent.

This service scored 58 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff assessed people’s needs and developed care plans based on these assessments. We found some information needed to be reviewed and updated. The acting manager had already identified this and was working on improving assessments and care records.

Relatives told us they were consulted and involved in reviews of care. Their comments included, “I have seen the care plan and was involved in creating this” and “We have annual reviews.”

People were supported with evidence-based care. Staff received guidance and direction from external professionals, healthcare teams and managers to help them understand what good care looked like. Staff undertook training to understand about how to support people with a learning disability. They also completed training to help understand about people’s different healthcare conditions.

Staff did not always communicate well with other staff or external professionals to ensure people received safe care. An external professional who worked closely with the service told us, “There have been examples of poor communication. These include incident when newly prescribed medicines were not recorded or given, a poor handover to emergency medical staff and non-adherence to guidelines from specialists.”

The acting manager told us they were working to improve information sharing and learning within the staff team. There were regular staff meetings. We saw these included discussions about best practice and the individual needs of people living at the service.

Staff did not always provide the right support to meet people’s healthcare needs. There had been instances when staff had failed to ensure safe care to meet specific healthcare conditions. The acting manager had improved guidance for staff to ensure better care in the future.

A visiting nurse worked closely with staff to monitor and meet people’s healthcare needs. They contacted staff daily and visited weekly to discuss people’s health and support the staff to make referrals to specialists when needed.

Staff created health action plans which outlined how people needed to be supported. People had regular access to external professionals and doctors.

Staff supported people to have a healthy and varied diet and plenty to drink.

Staff did not always monitor people’s wellbeing or outcomes. Each person was assigned a key member of staff who was tasked with reviewing people’s care each month and helping make sure planned objectives were met. Records of these reviews did not always include a comprehensive assessment of how the person was and whether they needed more support. Staff recorded the care they provided to people each day. However, these records did not always record about people’s wellbeing or outcomes. The acting manager explained they had already identified this concern and were supporting staff to understand how to create better records which could be used to help plan people’s care.

The provider assessed people’s mental capacity to make different decisions. Some people living at the service did not use words to communicate. Staff considered their individual communication needs and tried to present choices in a way people could understand. We observed staff offering people choices and respecting their decisions.

People lacked the mental capacity to make complex decisions. Staff told us they liaised with their representatives to discuss the best interests for each person with different decisions. Staff completed training to understand about their legal responsibilities and were able to explain these to us.

Relatives told us they were involved in important decisions.