The Willows

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 the best possible outcomes because their needs were assessed. Their care, support and treatment reflected these needs and any protected equality characteristics. The service worked in harmony, with people at the centre of their care. People were enabled and encouraged to make their own choices. People were supported to live independently. People were supported within the service and within the community to achieve their goals and aspirations.

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 health and welfare needs were fully assessed to ensure they were responded to effectively. For example, some people had epilepsy. There were detailed assessments and support plans to inform staff what seizures looked like, how to give emergency medicine and when to seek additional medical support. All care documentation was available to staff on handheld devices. Staff were familiar with their use and how to access information regarding people and their needs. Each person had a key worker who with people and other interested parties reviewed and updated the care documentation to capture any changing needs. Recent work had been completed on identifying achievements and personal goals for people to support a fulfilling life. Key workers had been given a lead role on progressing this area.

Staff knew people well and were able to respond to their individual needs. During discussions staff were able to relay the contents of an individual PBS plan confirming the specific care and approach that should be followed for the best outcomes for people. Staff worked with other health and social care professionals to update and review support plans. For example, the SaLT team was involved regularly with the correct diets, and the local authority had been involved in recent updates to a PBS plan.

The computer system used by the service supported a thorough assessment of people’s needs in a methodical way. Staff meetings were held and people’s needs were discussed along with plans for changes and improvements to care and support delivery.

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.

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.

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.

People's choice and consent was valued, and the staff continually consulted people about their wellbeing and wishes. Staff used various tools such as objects or pictures to support people in making choices. People who were not able to communicate verbally had mechanisms in place to facilitate communication to enable them to express their views and understanding. Staff understood people’s individual non-verbal cues for example, a staff member explained how a person tapped an area to demonstrate they wanted to go to the toilet.

Staff completed Mental Capacity Act training and had a good understanding of the importance of consent and upholding people's rights to have choice and control over their lives. A staff member said, “We are updated on any policy change. I like going with people on appointment I say, I know your rights I have got you. I enjoy sticking up for people.” Other staff said, “All staff engage very well with people, if you make them happy you are happy too” and “We always ask for consent always explain next steps and always use a kind approach.”

We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA), whether appropriate legal authorisations were in place when needed to deprive a person of their liberty. The service worked within the principles of the MCA and if needed, appropriate legal authorisations were in place to deprive a person of their liberty. When people were assessed as lacking capacity to make decisions appropriate procedures were followed to ensure principles within the MCA were followed. Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) applications and authorisations were in place for people around any restrictions within their lives that they did not have capacity to consent to. Systems to review these were also in place. People's ability to consent to care and support had been assessed. Where people could not give informed consent, a best interest decision had been taken. For example, when sensors were used or medicine was given covertly. Views from others that were important to the person, such as relatives and professionals had also been considered when making decisions on people's behalf. The registered manager discussed the possible need for a best interest meeting prior to medical tests being completed for a person.