Jane 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

People’s needs were regularly assessed and reviewed. There was a multidisciplinary approach to assessment and care planning. This was supported by person-centred practices. People and those close to them were involved in planning their care. People had access to health and social care professionals and medical treatment. People’s rights were respected, and care and treatment provided in line with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible.

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.

People’s needs were assessed. Information was used to plan the way people received their care and support. Assessments considered people’s abilities, communication, sensory needs, and environment. Functional assessments were used to inform positive behaviour support (PBS) plans. People’s PBS plans provided detailed strategies about how best to support each person including when additional behaviour support was required. We observed staff implementing PBS strategies with positive outcomes.

Staff used information from assessments to plan people’s care and support. Health assessments enabled staff to monitor people’s health and provide timely interventions. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s behaviour support needs and understood the importance of a consistent approach to implementing behaviour strategies. Staff told us, “(person's name) does not like unpredictability. They need to know what is coming next, how we will react. That makes them feel safe and helps to reduce their anxiety.” Another said, “People are very complex, they need and expect a consistent approach from us.”

Assessments were carried prior to people joining the service to ensure their needs could be met. Multidisciplinary assessments provided information for targeted care planning. Assessment processes were person centred and encouraged partnership working.

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.

People were lawfully deprived of their liberty. Restrictive practices were in place to keep people safe from harm. These included locked doors, monitoring equipment and seatbelt adaptations. People lacked capacity to consent to their care and treatment and best interests’ decisions had been made appropriately on their behalf. We observed people were supported at home and in the community using the least restrictive options and were treated with dignity and respect.

Staff worked collaboratively with people, families, and professionals to ensure people’s rights and freedoms were respected. Staff had regard for people’s feelings and wishes and ensured these were considered in all decisions made on people’s behalf and in their best interest. Staff and managers worked within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005(MCA). They knew how to support people safely ensuring any restrictions necessary were proportionate to the risk and seriousness of harm to that person.

Where people were being deprived of their liberty, applications had been authorised by the local authority. Care plans evidence best interest decision-making in line with the MCA. Decision specific capacity assessments were in place.