CareTech Community Services Limited - 237 Kenton 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

People were supported by staff who knew their personal and individual needs well. People received individualised support that matched their personal preferences. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff assisted them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service upheld this practice.

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.

People’s individual needs were assessed and met. A relative told us, “[The provider] do act on [person’s] new health issues, and we are immediately informed about it. Staff are very active and they try new things with [person] and others, very good and innovative activities.”

Assessments considered aspects of people’s care and support such as people's healthcare background, mobility, personal care and safety requirements. Care support plans included information about people's needs and requirements, likes and dislikes and allergies. This helped ensure that people’s individual needs and wishes were respected and met. Daily records illustrated how staff had supported people and this enabled the service to monitor people’s progress. There was information on which health professionals were involved in people's care and their contact details. Processes were in place to support people to access health care professionals where required to ensure they received the appropriate support.

Staff knew people well and helped to ensure people received care and support that met their needs. The provider completed an initial assessment prior to providing care and support to people. This captured their needs, abilities and their preferences and formed the basis of their care plans. The registered manager was knowledgeable about people's health and wellbeing and ensured care staff were kept informed of changes.

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.

People and relatives spoke positively about the knowledge and competence of staff. They were complimentary about the stable workforce which provided consistency of staff. A relative told us, “Good staffing now. Very rarely agency, which was almost standard before. Changes in staffing is something what my relative would not tolerate easily. Familiarity is important to [them].”

Feedback obtained from a care professional was complimentary about the service. This care professional told us that the service was well resourced with a committed and well trained workforce.

Staff worked well as a team, sharing information with each other as necessary to ensure effective care was consistently provided. Staff completed daily handover and participated in monthly staff meetings where they were able to share information and important updates. This helped staff keep up to date with people’s changing needs.

Staff spoke enthusiastically about their work for the provider and expressed a commitment to people's wellbeing. They informed us there was good communication within the service and that morale was positive. They said they felt comfortable reaching out to their colleagues for support and that the team shared the same positive values and wanted to make a positive difference to people’s lives.

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 understood people's rights to make their own decisions and sought their consent. The registered manager and staff were able to demonstrate a good understanding of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and understood what actions to take if someone had refused care.

The service was working within the principles of the MCA and appropriate policies and procedures were in place to support this. Care records clearly documented whether people had capacity to make decisions about their care and their communication needs. Staff had received training in Mental Capacity and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguarding (DoLS) and were able to talk about the core principles of the MCA.

People were supported to have maximum control over their lives. They were directly involved in decisions about aspects of their care and support wherever possible. Assumptions were not made about people's capacity. A person told us, “They ask and do not assume I can’t do it. It’s up to me to decide. It feels good that they think of me.”