Verity Healthcare - Milton Keynes

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 Good. At this assessment the rating has changed to Requires Improvement: This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety.

There was an increased risk that people could be harmed. People were not always safe when using the service because risks to people had not always been assessed, identified and mitigated. Very few people in receipt of the regulated activity of personal care received support with medicines, where this was provided measures were not consistently in place to ensure medicines were safely managed.Staff had received the training required to support them to carry out people’s care. This included training in safeguarding and staff knew how to report concerns if necessary.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to people’s safe care and treatment.

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 Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good: This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

People’s needs were assessed when they started using the service. People were supported in line with the MCA and staff were trained in this.

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good: This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

People were supported to be as independent as possible and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good: This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

People were encouraged to provide feedback and any feedback provided was acted upon. Staff listened to people and treated people equally and without discrimination.

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 Good. At this assessment the rating has changed to Requires Improvement: This meant the management and leadership was inconsistent. Leaders and the culture they created did not always support the delivery of high-quality, person-centred care.

The provider had failed to ensure governance processes were effective. The systems in place had not resulted in the service being maintained to a safe and appropriate standard. Areas for improvement were not identified, and improvements were not made when required. Staff told us the provider was supportive and accessible, and they were able to raise any concerns they had with them.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to governance at the service.