Lifeways Community Care Ltd (Leicester)

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

People's needs and rights were supported. Staff were aware of people's preferences and respected these. People consented to their care and treatment. However, we found inconsistencies with the recording of people's health needs and guidance was not always consistent for staff members.

This service scored 67 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Feedback from relatives was positive about how their family member was supported with their individual care and support needs. Relatives confirmed they were involved assessments and review meetings and discussions. They confirmed care and support was based on individual routines, preferences and what was important to the person. A relative explained how their family member directed the care staff to meet their needs. They said, “[Name] has a consistent staff team who know them well. They will allow certain staff to do different things, some they allow to take to the barbers and others to cut their nails for example.” However, we found inconsistencies in information that recorded people's individual needs which meant we could not be assured that people would always receive consistent care and support.

Staff confirmed people have their needs assessed and they visit the placement before they move into the service. A staff member said, “Before people move to the service, they have an assessment completed, they will have visits before they move and support plans / guidance in place.” Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s individual routines, health conditions, emotional needs and risks, routines and what was important them. Staff told us guidance to support them was sufficiently detailed. A staff member said, “The care plans are very big. It takes a long time to read. But they tell you how to help people and how to support them.” Whilst staff demonstrated a good knowledge of individual people's needs, the lack of consistency in records increased the risk that people would not receive consistent care and support.

Records reviewed identified information was not consistently detailed and or up to date. For example, positive behavioural support plans (PBS) used to provide guidance for staff of how support people with emotional needs that impacted their behaviour were not always detailed in how to manage and mitigate known behavioural needs. Individual goals and activities were identified for staff to support people with. However, when reviewing supporting records for these goals and activities, there were not always realistic timescales set. This was discussed with the registered manager who confirmed they would address this matter. Compatibility assessments were completed for supported living shared accommodation to ensure people's needs and compatibility were appropriately assessed and considered.

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.

Relatives we spoke to were positive their family member was supported with any related health care needs, including attending health appointments which the person would accept. However, we found inconsistencies within health records and could not be fully assured that people were always appropriately supported with their individual health needs.

Staff demonstrated a good awareness of people’s health related needs. Staff also told us how they supported people to attend heath appointments and reviews and were aware of different approaches for the individuals they supported. Whilst staff demonstrated a good knowledge of people's health needs, recording of such information was not always consistent and we could not be fully assured that people's health related needs were always met.

People's health actions plans, associated health needs documents and guidance for staff evidenced inconsistencies in how people's health needs were being recorded. For example, health action plans did not consistently record when people last had an annual health review or attended health screening appointments such as the dentist, optician and chiropodist. We therefore were not fully assured people had been supported in accessing health screening appointments. One person’s last annual health review was dated January 2023 and was therefore overdue. Other people's last recorded appointment were dated 2022, whilst others had received an appointment during 2024. Another person had recently been discharged from hospital and there remained concerns about their health. Whilst some action had been taken to address this, not all associated records had been updated. We also identified outcomes of health appointments were not consistently recorded in health action plans. This was discussed with the registered manager, who provided examples of how staff had communicated appointment outcomes via the provider’s communication platform. However, maintaining up to date individual health care records is important in monitoring needs and changes. Whilst we concluded this was a recording issue, concerns and shortfalls were identified in management oversight and monitoring and is reported under the Well-led section of this assessment.

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.