Verve Homecare Ltd

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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

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.

The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

People’s needs were assessed prior to using the service. This was comprehensive and involved the person, their representative and health and social care professionals. There was a trauma informed approach to understanding people’s needs during the assessment and ongoing reviews.

As part of the assessment an analysis was completed to identify any additional training staff would need to enable them to effectively support people. This enabled the management to ensure staff had the appropriate skills and knowledge before the package of care was agreed.

The assessment informed the person’s care and support plan. We saw evidence this was kept under review as the person’s needs changed.

People’s communication needs were assessed and met to maximise the effectiveness of their care and treatment. Staff were provided with the training to enable them to communicate effectively with people whether that was Makaton, picture exchange communication systems (PECS) or the use of social stories.

The service 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.

The provider’s systems ensured staff were up to date with national legislation, evidence-based good practice and required standards. Policies and procedures were underpinned by national guidance and legislation. A member of staff told us care plans were written taken into consideration good practice guidelines and gave an example how a health care plan had been drawn up based on the advice from National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE). NICE help health and social care professionals to prevent ill health, promote good health and improve the quality of care and services.

Staff received training in line with Skills for Care and accredited with the British Institute for Learning Disabilities. A relative told us they had completed some training with the staff on the use of restraint.

The provider always worked well across teams and services to support people. They shared thorough assessments of people’s needs when they moved between different services, so people only needed to tell their story once.

Feedback from professionals was positive in how the service planned and delivered care. Comments included, “The senior team go above and beyond for my client, a lot of thought goes into rota management” and “Our client is very high risk with high needs, and the person-centred approach has seen them enjoy a fuller life with an improved presentation.”

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 were involved in making decisions on the support and care they needed. Care plans clearly described the support they needed and what they could do for themselves. People were encouraged to set goals such as increasing independence at home and managing their medications and finances.

People using the service had their nutritional needs assessed where appropriate. Information about people's preferred food, drink, food allergies, likes and dislikes were recorded. If any needs were identified with eating or drinking people were referred to the appropriate health care professionals for advice and support.

From talking with staff, it was evident they listened to people and acted on what was being said in respect of their needs, aspirations and wishes. A relative described to us how they kept their loved one fit and well by encouraging and supporting them to go for daily walks and trips to the beach. Another relative told us, “Staff work well with [person] and support them to do the things they enjoy, they are an outdoor person. The team are really good, it’s a stable team and they know them well.”

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

Each person had a clinical lead who was responsible for the package of care. Clinical leads told us they visited each person at least once a week to meet with the person, staff and family where relevant. People and their relatives confirmed their involvement and the positive links they had built with the clinical leads.

People’s hopes, aspirations and the outcomes were clearly recorded. People had been supported to achieve their aspirations. For example, 1 person had been supported by staff to go to London and Cardiff. For another person they had moved to a new property, which had a positive impact on their emotional wellbeing. Staff had supported the person throughout the move including looking after pets during the transition.

A relative was concerned their loved one was living in accommodation that did not have a garden. The service was not responsible for the accommodation. However, it was evident from talking with the senior management team they were supporting the family and the person to look for alternative options. Assurances were provided that the person had access to lots of safe outside areas to explore within their own community.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Staff knew how to seek consent and had followed the Mental Capacity Act (MCA)when people did not have capacity to make decisions for themselves. This included involving the people closest to them and to make sure decisions were made in their best interest.

Mental capacity assessments had been completed, and the registered managers and clinical leads were liaising with the placing authority to ensure Court of Protection applications had been made, as deemed necessary. Staff had a good understanding of the MCA and supported people to be involved in their care. Where there were conditions imposed, these were incorporated into the care plan for the individual and kept under review.