Weatherstones 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

All people had received support from the service for some time. Assessments were translated into support plans which were devised and reviewed with the full involvement of people and their families. People were involved in all aspects of their nutrition, such as meal planning and shopping although some support was required in preparing meals. People were encouraged to pursue healthy diets. The nutritional and hydration needs of people were closely monitored to ensure positive health. People and their families were involved in their care. Staff teams worked well together and demonstrated knowledge and a commitment to providing support to adults living with autism/learning disabilities. People were actively consulted in all aspects of their support with consent gained at all times.

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.

All people had been supported by the service for some time. Ongoing assessments of people's needs and preferences were in place. While people did not comment specifically on their overall quality of life, it was clear from their responses that they were able to undertake a variety of meaningful activities, were able to make decisions about their lives and recognise that they had the freedom to furnish and decorate their accommodation in line with their wishes. Families felt involved. They told us, "The management and care staff communications with our family is excellent at keeping us up to date through regular updates/reviews and the family days that have been held”.

Support plans provided an accurate account of support required in people's everyday life. Staff were knowledgeable about the needs of each person and were able to access care plans. They were able to describe the needs of people to us in detail which was accurate and was verified by our examination of support plans.

Ongoing assessments of need was achieved through the regular review of support plans and meeting with people, their families and other stakeholders.

People did not comment on this.

Staff described how they worked with multi-disciplinary teams and other professionals to ensure professional guidance was followed and this was reflected within care plans.

Processes such as risk assessments and care plans were based on evidence-based care and treatment. Care practice was reflective of and centred on the needs of people living with autism/learning disabilities. The provider demonstrated that good practice was based on up to date evidence and research. Some people had developed health conditions. These again were managed with evidence-based practice used and referred to.

Relatives commented on the staff team. They told us staff and "[Name's] assigned carers all show great care" and "The management and care staffs communications with our family is excellent", " I am really pleased with their excellent dedication to the quality of care".

Staff felt supported by the management team and felt that they worked together well as a team.

Partners told us, "The service is well led, and the manager and the team of managers are very responsive to recommendations.", "The people who are supported are happy and well cared for and a consistent person-centred approach is offered", "Whenever I have asked for further help it has been provided . Communication has been good, and I have been able to get what I need done in a straightforward way" and "staff are really positive and responsive to changes we are suggesting within the support being delivered"

Processes were in place to ensure the accurate recording and sharing of information of people's care needs. Peoples care plans included details of other services and professionals who were involved in a person’s support. Changes to people’s care needs were communicated to staff via the electronic care planning system and verbally.

People indicated that they were well. Family members confirmed people were supported to access other health services such as doctors and other professionals when needed. They told us new health conditions that had developed had been recognised and were managed. Families were clear that the health needs of people were promoted by the staff team.

Staff and the registered manager described the support provided for people to live healthier lives. Examples included supporting people with meal plans, shopping, and food preparation. They recognised that access to the community was beneficial to their mental health.

Support plans highlighted health issues and how these were to be met in partnership with people and their families. In turn these plans were reviewed regularly. Records of health appointments were in place and up to date. People were encouraged to develop their range of activities that would promote physical and mental health.

Relatives told us without exception that the service was committed to supporting people to achieve positive outcomes for their loved ones in every aspect of their lives.

We saw people experiencing positive outcomes. Staff told us people had progressed from them first coming to the service for support and despite initial reservations, where able to access a range of opportunities and influence their own lives with staff support.

The provider monitored people’s support to continuously enhance and improve it. They ensured outcomes were positive and consistent, and they met the expectations of people themselves.

People did not comment on this.

We saw examples of people being asked for prior consent for us to enter their individual accommodation. People consented to this after they had been fully informed of our intentions. Where people did not want us to enter their accommodation; this was respected. Staff were witnessed asking people for consent to support. Where restrictions were in place, these were appropriately assessed and reviewed. Staff described the process for consent to support and were able to give examples as to how they supported people to make decisions.

Communication needs were assessed and reflected the preferred method of communication of people. These were reviewed regularly. Included in this were strategies on how to successfully provide and receive information from people. People were informed in advance of our visit and were aware of our presence. Records to demonstrate the service was aware of people’s capacity to consent to care were robust. People’s capacity to make decisions had been recognised in conjunction with the MCA (Mental Capacity Assessments) Code of Practice 2005, and appropriate best interest meetings generated.