Support for Living Limited - 246 Haymill Close

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

We identified breaches in relation to person-centred care. People's needs were not always assessed and planned for in a person-centred way. People were supported to stay healthy and access healthcare services when needed. The provider assessed people's mental capacity and made decisions in their best interests. We did not assess all the quality statements within this key question. We used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.

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.

Assessments and care plans did not always include the views of people using the service or their relatives.

Staff told us they were involved in developing care plans. However, they had not always regularly reviewed these to make sure they were accurate and reflected people's needs.

Assessments and care plans were not always detailed enough or personalised. The staff had not helped people to develop personalised goals or objectives. They did not always reflect a good understanding of people's needs and how to meet these.

People did not always experience good quality care in accordance with best practice. They were not always supported to develop independent living skills. Their relatives told us they thought people were happy at the service, although they did not always have a variety of leisure experiences.

Staff were not always able to explain about good practice guidance and how they implemented this in their work. They had undertaken relevant training but had not always transferred this knowledge to ensure people experienced good quality care and an active lifestyle.

The provider did not always ensure the staff were delivering evidence-based care. They did not always support people with future planning or consider longer-term aspirations. Staff did not monitor or evaluate outcomes in a meaningful way in order to adapt the service when needed. People were not given enough learning opportunities to develop skills and gain independence. Staff followed routines which did not offer informed and meaningful choices. The provider had improved staff knowledge and skills to follow guidelines established by other healthcare professionals. There had been issues with staff not supporting people to eat and drink appropriately and when supporting them to move. The provider had introduced clearer guidance, better monitoring of staff and additional training when needed. This had helped staff to deliver more appropriate care.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

Relatives told us they thought people were given the support they needed to stay healthy.

Staff told us they worked closely with other healthcare professionals. They explained they had guidance from them to recognise and understand about people's healthcare conditions.

People's healthcare needs had been assessed and planned for. They had regular appointments with the GP and other healthcare professionals when needed. The staff had developed health action plans. They monitored people's health and alerted medical professionals when people's health changed.

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.

Relatives told us they were consulted about decisions to help make sure these were made in people's best interests.

Staff told us they had undertaken training to understand about consent and mental capacity. They understood the principles of this and their legal obligations.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (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 MCA 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 make decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). In care homes, and some hospitals, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We found the provider had assessed people's mental capacity to make decisions. They had created decision making profiles to show how to present information and people's capacity for different decisions. They had applied for DoLS authorisations when needed.