Healthvision UK Ltd - North Kensington

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 had their needs assessed and reviewed regularly. Care plans were detailed and kept up to date. Staff knew people’s needs well and completed additional and person specific training. Staff understood people’s communication needs and worked in different ways to make sure they communicated effectively with the people they supported. Staff worked well with each other, as well as in partnership with other relevant professionals.

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.

Staff told us that everyone had a care plan, which explained their support needs. Staff confirmed that care plans were reviewed regularly and kept up to date. One member of staff told us, “We have all the details in the care plan. Especially on the first visit, some clients can speak to us and tell us [what they need].” Another person explained that if they had any concerns about a person they were visiting, they would record it in their care plan and also send an email to the care supervisor and coordinator.” Most staff said they visited the same people regularly and said they knew people’s needs well. One care worker told us, “Yes, when we regularly visit, we do know their needs.” Another member of staff said, “Yes, I do. [name]’s care needs and preference are found in their care plans.” Staff told us they completed additional and person specific training when needed. One person told us, “Yes, through the [learning disability and autism] training I understood how to provide support that promotes choice, rights and independence.” Other staff members told us they had completed training for various techniques of moving and handling, including different equipment, as well as training for PEG (Percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy) feeding and stoma care.

We saw that people’s care plans included assessments of need, as well as risk assessments. These covered areas that were important to people, such as health, and daily living. All of these were regularly reviewed and updated as people’s needs changed. Frequent contact with people was also made by office staff to help ensure they were receiving the care and support they required. The registered manager had sent us information, prior to this assessment, about the different ways the service worked with and supported people with their individual communication needs. For example, one person who was unable to communicate verbally, used an ‘eye gaze’ computer to communicate with care staff. Staff ensured the person was not rushed and had enough time to use their device to ask questions and respond to staff’s questions. Another person used a notepad and pen to communicate questions and messages to care staff. A third person was hearing impaired but did not like to wear hearing aids, so care staff were trained to speak loudly, slowly and clearly. They were also trained to speak in front of the person so they could lip read. Staff also used body language and gestures.

People using the service and their family members told us they had their needs assessed and these were regularly reviewed. One person’s relative told us, “They do check on what [name] needs [in their care plan] from time to time, so that’s a lot better now.” Another person’s relative said, “The last care coordinator came the day before she left and did a complete assessment, then the new care co coordinator came and introduced himself and did another complete assessment, so that’s all up to date.” A third relative told us, “I know the Deputy manager has been out to see [relative] a couple of times.” Most people said they were happy with the level of care provided and confirmed that staff knew and met their needs well. One person told us, “Yes, I am very happy with the way the team support me.” Another person said, “They understand what is needed to support me and I speak about what I need.” We asked people if they had been involved in setting up and agreeing their care packages. One person responded, “Yes, I was, definitely.” A person’s relative said, “No, that would have been [name] as they had capacity then, I am now their Power of Attorney.” People told us there was mostly good communication between them and the care staff. One person told us, “I have very good communication with the care staff and they are very nice to me.” Another person said, “Some of the care workers don’t speak English properly. The regular one communicates with me nicely.” A third person told us, “At the moment they are good. I get the same lady every day. I am Filippino and can communicate with them.”

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.

The provider’s policy and other records we looked at confirmed that the service communicated effectively and worked in partnership with other relevant professionals when required. For example, the safeguarding log described how certain incidents had been referred to the police or people’s GPs. Other incidents such as falls or mobility issues were referred to the falls team and occupational therapy teams. Information and external advice and communication was clearly documented, which meant it could be shared effectively with other services at any time.

People told us that care staff worked well with each other and other healthcare professionals when needed and supported them to stay as healthy and well as possible.

A local authority commissioner told us that the provider worked well with them and shared information appropriately. They said the provider attended multidisciplinary meetings when necessary and was always very responsive to any comments or suggestions for making improvements and taking the service further forward.

Staff and management confirmed that care and support was well coordinated throughout the service, as well as with external health and social care professionals. The registered manager told us that the operations and management teams were very experienced at working with all relevant community services to ensure that people using the service received ‘joined-up’ care. They gave examples of this in the Provider Information Return (PIR), such as working closely with the district nursing team, speech and language therapists, occupational therapists, physiotherapists and, where applicable, people’s social workers. The registered manager told us their interactions between these different professionals included providing updates of people’s health conditions and making referrals where appropriate.

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.

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