New Boundaries Group - 329 Fakenham 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

External care plans to meet people’s communication needs had not been effectively implemented by staff. Systems within the service to support external professionals to make treatment and care decisions were ineffective. This was a breach of Regulation 9 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. Further work was needed to ensure care plans provided more information on people’s needs. The staff team worked well together to help met people’s needs. Staff, and the systems in place, supported people to help express their preferences and needs. People’s capacity to make decisions had been considered and assessed when needed.

This service scored 67 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and their individual preferences. Staff provided us with examples on how they supported people’s communication needs.

People had holistic care plans in place which covered a range of areas. However, they did not always provide sufficient information on their needs and how to support them. For example, whilst information on people’s life history was in place this was not detailed. Communication care plans did not always provide detailed enough information or incorporate advice from professionals. Processes were in place to support people to provide staff with information on their preferences and needs.

People and relatives told us they felt people’s needs were met. Relatives provided us with examples on how staff met their family members’ needs in a range of areas. These included with their emotions, health, activities, and interests.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

Staff told us they felt they had a good staff team who worked well together. One staff member told us, “We all just work as a team, we’re supportive of each other.” Some staff told us they felt a lack of consistent management support and leadership had meant they did not always have the right support to effectively implement health professionals’ recommendations.

People and relatives told us there was a good staff team in place who worked well together. People and relatives told us they were happy with how staff worked with them. Relatives told us information was shared with them appropriately.

Health professionals we spoke with told us improvements were needed in how staff worked with them to meet people’s needs. Monitoring forms were not always completed as required and staff did not implement communication strategies effectively.

Systems were not effective in collating information required for external health professionals. These were not logged separately and were contained within people’s care notes so were difficult to find. The provider did not carry out their own analysis of these records to support review of these records. Processes were not in place to ensure care plans and recommendations from health professionals were implemented. Recommended communication tools were not in use.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

Staff could tell us about how they supported people to make decisions. They were aware of people’s capacity to make decisions in areas and how this might impact how staff supported them. Staff told us they had received training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005).

Assessments on people’s ability to make decisions in a range of areas had been carried out in line with the MCA 2005. Systems were in place to consult with people on their day-to-day preferences and routines.

People told us staff listened to them and supported them to do things they liked when they liked. We observed staff sought people’s consent when supporting them.