Tanglewood Mews

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

The service was not always effective. We Identified a breach of regulation regarding consent. People were supported to have their capacity assessed but were not always involved in decisions effectively. Person centred approaches were not always followed and support plans didn’t always reflect peoples likes and dislikes.

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.

People’s needs were assessed before they came to use the service. Feedback from people was positive. However, communication plans for people were not always followed. Some communication plans were very minimal and these were not always recorded in a person centred way.

The service worked with speech and language therapy teams and other healthcare professionals when assessing peoples needs.

Processes were not always person centred. Care planning was not always reflective of peoples likes and dislikes when meeting their needs.

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.

Peoples rights to consent was not always reflected in the culture of the organisation. Some decisions were made for people without their consent or the appropriate consultation.

Staff understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act and worked closely with external health professionals to complete capacity assessments, as needed.

People were not always supported effectively to exercise their rights around consent or respected when we delivering person-centred care and treatment. Best interest decisions were made for people without following the appropriate process or effective recording.