The Care Quality Commission (CQC) gave Waltham Forest Council a 64/100 in its assessment, reports Marco Marcelline

The Care Quality Commission (CQC), has rated Waltham Forest Council’s adult social care provision as “good”, or 64 out of 100.

CQC looked at nine areas spread across four themes to assess how well the authority is meeting their responsibilities in order to create their good rating. CQC has given each of these nine areas a score out of four with one being the evidence shows significant shortfalls, and four showing an exceptional standard.

Waltham Forest received a three in all areas apart from assessing needs, care provision, integration and continuity, safe pathways, systems and transitions, and safeguarding where it received a two (requires improvement).

CQC noted that “some people had good experiences of assessment, care and support and were largely satisfied”. Some people, however, experienced difficulties in accessing information and advice, found the system “complex to navigate or off putting”, and then had to wait for Care Act assessments and/or occupational therapy assessments, CQC said.

The CQC found the local authority had a “very strong overarching preventative offer for the population based on a strategic intent and investment in early help”. They highlighted the Early Help service specifically as a resource that meant people were less likely to need a package of care or further support from the local authority for at least six months.

Chris Badger, CQC’s chief inspector of adult social care and integrated care, said: “At this assessment, we found that people in Waltham Forest often had positive experiences when receiving adult social care. Many told us they felt respected and involved in decisions about their support.

“There were examples where staff took time to understand what mattered most to individuals and shaped care around that. Such as supporting someone to stay independent rather than rely on formal services, or tailoring dementia activities around a person’s culture and language.

“The local authority had a strong commitment to reducing inequalities. Staff worked in ways that recognised people’s cultural backgrounds, including their languages and beliefs. However, some partners told us some isolated individuals and seldom-heard communities continued to face barriers in accessing help. While the local authority had launched several initiatives to address this, many had not yet shown a measurable impact on outcomes.

“We also heard that some people faced delays in accessing support, particularly unpaid carers and those waiting for occupational therapy. The system could be difficult to navigate, and not everyone knew what they were entitled to. While Waltham Forest Council had taken steps to improve access and reduce waiting times, people still had inconsistent experiences and evidence of impact from the changes was at an early stage.”

CQC found that the council “didn’t always” apply strengths-based approaches effectively across adult social care teams, meaning staff didn’t consistently focus on what mattered most to the person. At the time of the assessment, only a quarter of teams had completed relevant strength-based practice training.

Additionally, Waltham Forest “didn’t always monitor people placed out of area consistently”, which meant some didn’t receive timely support when their needs or circumstances changed, CQC said.

Waltham Forest Council leader Grace Williams reacted to the rating, saying in her newsletter: “I am pleased to see the CQC report’s recognition of our successful partnership building approach, our use of data to target provision effectively – and most importantly – how service users themselves feel included, independent and catered for.

“But we are not complacent. The report also demonstrates further opportunities for improvement, including more robust training for staff and greater monitoring of residents placed outside the borough.”

Read the CQC’s full findings here

No news is bad news

Independent news outlets like ours – reporting for the community without rich backers – are under threat of closure, turning British towns into news deserts.

The audiences they serve know less, understand less, and can do less.

If our coverage has helped you understand our community a little bit better, please consider supporting us with a monthly, yearly or one-off donation.

Choose the news. Don’t lose the news.

Monthly direct debit

Annual direct debit

£5 per month supporters get a digital copy of each month’s paper before anyone else, £10 per month supporters get a digital copy of each month’s paper before anyone else and a print copy posted to them each month. £50 annual supporters get a digital copy of each month's paper before anyone else.