Magna House

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

At our last inspection we rated this key question as Good. At this inspection the rating has remained the same. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this. We found the service used the correct processes, equipment, and assessments to ensure that peoples outcomes were good. The correct processes and training were in place to support staff to fulfil their roles and responsibilities in an effective and confident manner. Staff had a good understanding around capacity to consent, however it was difficult to be seen and evidenced though the online care record system. People were supported if they had communication needs, however, there was a limited number of person-centred decoration or signage within the ward.

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.

Patients said that staff did treat them as individuals, and they were involved in their treatment decisions, however it was difficult to gain answers to questions in a timely manner from doctors and consultants. Patients said that they felt involved in their care planning and risk assessment contributing to these when needed but this was difficult to be seen and evidenced through documentation via the online portal. Patients said that their families and other people who contributed to their care were invited to attend treatment reviews. Patients said they felt that everyone worked well with them showing them kindness and respect.

Staff said that they always encourage the patient to be as involved as possible with both the care planning and risk assessment process. There was limited evidence to show that staff demonstrated the patients voice within support plans and documentation held on the online portal.

Staff were able to describe processes that are in place to complete admission assessments and ensure care plans were person centred and kept up to date, however documentation of this within the online system was difficult to be seen and evidenced.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

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.

We did not look at Consent to care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.