All Saints Vicarage

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’s health, care and communication needs were assessed and regularly reviewed. Capacity was assessed and best interests decisions were made following the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005).

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 were supported by staff who assessed and reviewed people's needs regularly. Relatives told us they were involved in their loved one’s care, and reviews of people’s health and wellbeing. Care plans didn’t always record relatives’ involvement. An advocate told us the care people received was very good and was highly individual. They said, “They are very caring for the clients who are able to do their own individual thing and have their own individual space.”

Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs, they said communication plans, positive behaviour support plans, care plans and risk assessments were in place. Staff said they included people as best as they could, and families were involved in various ways. Key workers were responsible for ensuring care records and risk assessments were accurate and involved families and multi-disciplinary team working. An advocate told us people received the right care and said the person they advocated for had progressed since commencing at the service. They told us, “(Person) has an excellent quality of life. The support is totally geared to their needs. They go cycling, swimming, walking. But they also balance that with their emotional needs.” The registered manager told us they were currently assessing one person for the service and spoke about the need to assess them in terms of a fit for the service “community”, as well as whether they could meet the person’s needs.

Care plans were comprehensive and provided key information in relation to people’s needs and actions for staff to follow. People had positive behaviour support plans which helped staff identify the level of possible distress people were experiencing and how this should be supported or addressed. People had goals set as part of their care plans, although it was not always clear if these goals had been met or whether people were progressing onto new goals once original points had been achieved. Care reviews were of variable quality. Some contained good information, but some monthly reviews were missing or were poorly completed. Reviews often lacked detailed information and were more functional rather than being about the person as an individual.

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 were able to consent to day-to-day care. Where they were unable to consent best interest decisions had been made, in line with the Mental Capacity Act (2005). People looked happy and content and staff were respectful of people’s decisions. An advocate told us staff supported people to engage in a range of activities and make decisions about their life.

Staff understood people's capacity and confirmed that if people refused support, it was important to respect their wishes and ask again later. Staff understood best interest decisions were needed in relation to people who had been assessed as lacking the capacity.

The principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) were followed. Staff were seen involving people in making day to day decisions. Where more complex decisions were made then best interest decisions had been made to ensure they were of benefit to the person and the least restrictive option was implemented. Family members and professionals had been involved in these decisions. Staff understood the importance of supporting people in a way which supported them to make choices, within an appropriate framework. People had bespoke communication plans, so staff understood what people’s vocalisations or gestures meant and how they communicated their wants and needs.