We carried out a review of the data available to us about Hyde Park House on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Hyde Park House, you can give feedback on this service.
At our last inspection in August 2015 the service was rated as good overall with an outstanding rating for the key question of responsive. At this inspection we found the service had improved and we have rated it as outstanding in responsive and effective making the overall rating outstanding.
The provider is required to have a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. We found there was a registered manager in post and throughout this report we will refer to them as ‘the manager’.
The provider demonstrated how they had achieved outstanding practice, development and improvement at the service. The leadership team sought creative ways to provide a personalised service and had achieved excellent results through exploring best practice and professional support and implementing it to enhance people's lives.
The staff team were highly motivated and were actively involved in and contributed to the continuous improvements in care and support. The provider and manager were dedicated to providing individualised care that met the highest of standards and promoted people’s independence and quality of life.
The manager demonstrated a strong and supportive leadership style, seeking feedback in order to further improve the care and support provided. The manager and staff team used innovative, but safe practices to develop people’s life skills and promote positive behavioural support practices.
Communication with the service was excellent at all levels and encouraged mutual respect between staff and people who used the service. The service was recognised by a scheme which rewards quality in people management called Investors in People.
People received exceptionally effective care. The service worked with external health and social care professionals to provide person-centred, tailored packages of care that had a positive impact on outcomes for people who used the service.
There was a truly holistic approach to assessing, planning and delivering care and support. Each person who used the service had a personal development plan linked to their goals and aspirations.
There was a strong emphasis on eating and drinking well. People were given guidance and support to assist them in making healthy choices and were encouraged to learn how to prepare and cook simple and more complex meals. A particular strength within the service was the way people were supported to develop their numeracy and literacy skills to enable them to manage their money and go out shopping independently. The subsequent increase in daily living skills meant people were eventually able to move on to more independent supported living.
The atmosphere within the service was exceedingly friendly and open. A positive and innovative way of managing risk was discussed and developed with people who used the service. Their goals and ambitions were recognised and valued and people received excellent support to achieve their ambitions.
We found, without exception, that staff went the extra mile to ensure people were safe and happy within their lives. People were at the heart of the service, which was organised to suit their individual needs and aspirations. People’s achievements were notable and people were justifiably proud of what they had done - their self confidence was high and people wanted to share with us what they had achieved.
People were supported by staff that were enthusiastic and keen to see them succeed in life. Staff were also caring, kind and compassionate with people, recognising them as individuals and treating them with respect and dignity.
The provider carried out robust recruitment checks, to ensure they employed suitable people. There were sufficient staff employed to meet people’s needs and people’s medicines were managed safely. Staff had completed relevant training. We found that they received regular supervision, which gave them the support necessary to fulfil their roles effectively.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
We inspected this service on 28 July 2015. This was an unannounced inspection.
Hyde Park House is owned and managed by Integra Care Limited. It is registered to provide care and support for up to ten adults, who have a learning disability. The property is made up of two adjoining houses. One side of the house is known as 'the flat' and contains three semi-independent flats, plus shared kitchen, lounge and kitchen. The main 'house' accommodates seven adults and also has a shared lounge, kitchen and dining room. All rooms are for single occupancy and have en suite facilities. Hyde Park House is within walking distance of Harrogate town centre. At the time of our visit nine people were using the service.
The service had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
The registered manager and provider regularly assessed and monitored the quality of care to ensure national and local standards were met and maintained. Continual improvements to care provision were made which showed the registered manager and provider were committed to delivering high quality care.
All of the staff received regular training that provided them with the knowledge and skills to meet people’s needs in an effective and individualised manner.
People’s health and wellbeing needs were closely monitored and the staff worked very well with other professionals to ensure these needs were met.
A flexible approach to mealtimes was used to ensure people could access suitable amounts of food and drink that met their individual preferences. This helped people to maintain healthy weights and encouraged their independence.
Staff sought people’s consent before they provided care and support. However, some people who used the service were unable to make certain decisions about their care. In these circumstances the legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were being followed. Where people had restrictions placed upon them to keep them safe, the staff made sure people’s rights to receive care that met their needs and preferences were protected. Where people were restricted to promote their safety, the staff continued to ensure people’s care preferences were respected and met and that they were supervised when required.
There was a positive atmosphere within the home and people were very much at the heart of the service. People and their relatives, where necessary, were enabled to be involved in the care. Staff implemented the service’s core values to ensure people had a meaningful and enjoyable life. People were involved in the assessment and review of their care. Staff supported and encouraged people to access the community and participate in activities, including paid and voluntary work placements, that were important to them. A literacy and numeracy initiative had been introduced over the last twelve months and this had been positively received.
Feedback was sought and used to improve the care. People knew how to make a complaint and complaints were managed in accordance with the provider’s complaints policy.
Any risks to people were identified, managed and reviewed and the staff understood how to keep people safe. There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to meet people’s needs and promote people’s safety and independence. Systems were in place to protect people from the risks associated from medicines, incidents and emergencies.
People were treated with kindness, compassion and respect and staff promoted people’s independence and right to privacy. The staff were extremely committed to their work roles and provided people with a positive care experience. They ensured people’s care preferences were met and gave people opportunities to try new experiences.
People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights. We spoke with five people who used the service and they told us that they had been included in decisions about what care and support they received. One person told us "It's a nice place to live. I go out with staff and on my own." Another person said, "The staff are alright. We all decide what we eat and help each other in the house.'
People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.
There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs. We spoke with three members of staff who were able to demonstrate a good understanding of the needs of the people who lived at Hyde Park House. They told us that they were well supported by the manager of the home, and the provider and there were good opportunities for training.
The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive. A recent survey showed that people were satisfied with the service and we looked at the audits being carried out, which were being done to monitor and assess the quality of the service.
We spoke with three people living at the home and one visiting community support worker. Comments relating to staff included "Staff are great" and "Staff are really nice and friendly". When asked, people told us that they were well cared for. One person said "I can't fault it".
We looked at all of the people's medication administration records. We saw that all the people had received their medication for that day and at all other required times prior to our inspection. This helped to ensure that people received the correct medication which helped to keep them well.
People said they had not needed to make a complaint but they were sure that their comments and complaints would be listened to and acted on. However, there was not an effective system in place for making people aware of how to make a complaint and for recording minor complaints raised. We have asked the provider to address this.
We spoke with people about meals at the home. People confirmed that they make their own choices about what they eat. One person told us that they enjoyed cooking meals for the other residents who live at the home. One person said "There is nothing wrong with the food here" whilst another said that the food was 'average'
We also had opportunity to speak with a visiting health care professional who told us that the home was "One of the best for our clients" They also told us that communication between the home and them was 'very good' They also said "The staff here deserve a pat on the back for the good work they do"
We spoke with the Local Authority Contracts Officer who informed us that they did not have any concerns about this service