Bliss Care And Training Ltd - Barnet

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

Staff received regular training, supervisions and spot checks. When people were unwell or needed further support staff responded. These events were shared with the office staff who informed the managers who ensured actions and changes in people’s needs were followed up. For example, one person’s relative told us, “If [name of relative] needs to be referred to the GP, the carers speak to me, and I arrange it. We all successfully work together for the care of my [relative].” However, people’s needs were not always effectively explored and assessed, with accompanying detailed care plans to guide staff in meeting people’s care needs. Consent was sought from staff when they supported people, however the management team were not always following the principles of the MCA when considering restrictive practices and why they were assessing people’s mental capacity. Improvements were needed with their understanding of this legislation and the purpose of it for the people they supported.

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.

People were aware their care needs had been assessed.

Staff said they referred to the communication log and were told about people’s needs when they started. Staff knew about the risk assessments and care plans, but they were not able to give examples of accessing these documents. The provider had commissioned a new electronic care plan system to be introduced early next year, which they believe would help staff to have better access to people’s care plans and risk assessments.

Managers had created processes for people’s needs to be assessed and accompanying care plans to be created for staff to follow. However, we found shortfalls in the quality of these documents. Effective processes were not in place to ensure these assessments and plans were accurate, thorough, and effective at identifying, exploring, and managing people’s needs and risks.

People were happy with the care they received. This included when they needed further support, such as feeling unwell.

Staff completed daily notes and medicine records to record the care they had provided. Managers completed regular spot checks to assure themselves staff were competent in key areas of their work.

Processes were in place to evidence care provided. But we found improvements were needed in these records to better demonstrate the care that had been provided.

People felt staff worked together well. Communication had improved and was now good.

Staff spoke positively about the support they received from managers and supervisors. Especially when they requested assistance in the ‘out of hours’ service. Team meetings and supervisions took place on a regular basis. Staff said they found these supportive.

No concerns were identified here.

The provider and management team had created processes to support staff and promote staff at all levels and roles in the service working together.

People said staff supported them to live healthier lives and other people felt confident staff would promote their health if there was a need to do this. Some gave examples of when this happened. For instance, staff suggesting the person spoke to their GP about a health matter or directly calling the GP or alerting their relatives, when this was needed.

Staff gave examples of when they had identified a person was unwell, from presenting differently to how they normally would, to visiting people and noting they were clearly unwell. On each occasion staff told us they took timely and appropriate action.

Staff had been directed to respond to instances when a person was unwell and to alert the office staff about this. Managers had also followed up with the local authority and people’s relatives to check on the outcomes of events when a person was unwell or experienced a change in need.

People spoke well of the spot checks which took place monitoring staff practice and the telephone calls from the office asking for feedback about their care.

No concerns were identified.

Processes were in place to monitor the care people received. Although, we found some improvements were needed in how this work was evidenced.

People told us staff sought their consent when they came to their homes and supported them with care tasks.

Staff understood the importance of seeking consent and managing situations when people did not want their support, especially if they were living with dementia. Managers had sought consent to share information with other partners and agencies. However, we found issues with how the MCA was applied.

Processes were in place to seek consent, train staff about MCA, and for other staff to assess mental capacity and take certain actions if required. However, the principles of the MCA were not followed by staff who assessed people’s mental capacity and made related care plans for people.