Essex and Suffolk Quality Care Ltd

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment improvements had been made, and the rating has changed to good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

People were safely supported and risks to their health and wellbeing were well managed. The provider understood their responsibilities to keep people safe from harm and abuse. Medicines were managed safely and staff followed infection control policies and procedures. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs, and they had been trained and supported to understand their role. The provider took appropriate actions and had systems in place for learning when things went wrong and made changes to improve the service.

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment improvements had been made, and the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

People were involved in the planning and delivery of their care. Staff sought people’s consent before providing care. Where people could not consent to care, a representative was appointed as the agreed decision maker for more complex affairs. People had their needs assessed before care commenced and how they wished their care to be delivered was recorded. People were supported to have their nutrition, and hydration needs met where required. There were effective approaches to monitor people’s care and treatment and their outcomes.

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. This key question has remained good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and encouraged people to remain independent. People were supported by a caring staff group who respected their choices and preferences. Staff felt supported by the registered manager and colleagues and felt able to contribute to decision making.

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment improvements had been made, and the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

People were supported to make decisions about their own care and support. Staff treated people as individuals, providing a person-centred approach. People had access to health care professionals to ensure their health needs were met when required. People’s future planning and end of life wishes had been discussed and documented.

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment improvements had been made, and the rating has changed to good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.