Ivy Court

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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 62 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The service did not always make sure people’s care and treatment were effective because they did not always check and discuss people’s health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. People's needs were assessed and care was delivered in line with people's needs. However, sometimes care plans did not reflect current update to people’s needs. Staff knew people well so this mitigated the risk.

The service did not always plan and deliver people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. Care records showed people had been referred to appropriate professionals for support and advice but some care records did not show this advice had been followed. For example, fortified diets were not always documented accurately and people’s food and fluid charts were not completed effectively.

The service worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services. The electronic care planning system was used to print off hospital packs with key information about people’s care needs if they need move between services.

The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. People were supported to attend out-patient appointments at the local hospital. There were good links with the local GP surgery which meant clinicians had access to information about people’s care needs.

The service 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. People were supported with their medical needs whilst maintaining their independence. Healthcare professionals were contacted as required for clinical interventions and advice.

The service did not always tell people about their rights around consent and did not always respect their rights when delivering care and treatment. Prior to this inspection people did not have specific care plans in place regarding mental capacity to ensure people were supported in their best interests and in the least restrictive way. The provider had identified this as an area of improvement and were working to make improvements following the inspection.