Haythorne Place

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

During our assessment of this key question, we found the accuracy of written records was not consistent across the service. Some people did not feel involved in their care planning; however people told us they felt able to discuss their concerns with staff. Despite the concerns identified at this assessment, scores pulled through from previous assessments in relation to other quality statements under effective mean that overall this service is still rated as good for providing an effective service.

This service scored 67 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Feedback from people and their relatives was mixed. Some people felt they were involved in their care planning and the information recorded about them, however other people told us they were not involved in this.

Some staff told us that people’s preferences and needs were ascertained by speaking to people and through the services internal processes, such as handover records. Some staff were able to tell us detailed information about the people they support. However, some staff also had difficulty in identifying safety issues in relation to people's needs at lunch time when asked by inspectors.

People's care plans were not always up to date. Inconsistent information was viewed which related to the monitoring of people’s health and care needs. Some plans and risk assessments lacked sufficient detail to ensure that appropriate care was delivered. Some care plans lacked person-centred details about people's preferences and how to meet people's communicative needs. Governance and audit process at the service had failed to identify deficiencies within peoples care plans and risk assessments.

Feedback from people and their relatives was mixed in relation to their involvement in planning care. However, people told us they were able to see health professionals and report problems when needed.

Some staff were able to tell us detailed information about the people they support. However, some staff also had difficulty in identifying safety issues in relation to people's needs at lunch time when asked by inspectors.

People's care plans were not always up to date. Inconsistent information was viewed which related to the monitoring of people’s health and care needs. Some plans and risk assessments lacked sufficient detail to ensure that appropriate care was delivered. Staff feedback about people's care needs and people's written records were not always consistent.

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 told us they felt able to discuss any concerns they may have with staff at the service.

Staff told us how they ensure consent to care and treatment is sought when they are supporting people.

Processes were in place to ensure that legal duties were fulfilled in relation to consent to care and treatment.