Ladyfield House

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 this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. Prior to moving into the home, people’s needs were assessed to ensure the service could meet their needs effectively. We saw care plans were reviewed on a regular basis and reflected people's current needs.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. Signage throughout the home assisted people to navigate to their bedrooms and communal areas. Dietary notification forms were completed and shared with the catering team to ensure people received the appropriate diet. People were complimentary about the food provision. One person said, “The food is very good, and if there is nothing you like you can have something else.” Another person said, “We get plenty of food and it’s good.”

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services. Staff had access to information they needed to support people in line with their needs and preferences. We saw evidence that information was shared between teams. Staff ensured they followed guidance given from professionals to ensure better outcomes for people.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. People had access to healthcare professionals and referrals were made in a timely way.

The provider did not always routinely monitor people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They did not always ensure that outcomes were positive and consistent. Documents in place to manage anxieties did not contain sufficient information to assist staff in providing effective support. Records sometimes showed a lack of understanding of people’s needs and diagnosis. The provider took action to address these concerns. We saw referrals were made to ensure other professionals were involved in people’s care and support.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. 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 take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. The registered manager could evidence this framework had been followed and where people lacked capacity, decisions had been made in their best interests.