Archived: Hunters Creek Care Home with Nursing

Updated 5 September 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

This inspection was carried out by two inspectors, an assistant inspector, an Expert by Experience and a professional advisor who was a registered nurse. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type

Hunters Creek is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with nine people who used the service and six relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with 16 members of staff including the registered manager, deputy manager, senior care workers, care workers, domestic staff, catering staff, nursing staff and the nominated individual. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider. We reviewed a range of records. This included 10 people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at five staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data and quality assurance records.

Updated 5 September 2019

About the service

Hunters Creek is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to 80 older adults and people living with dementia at the time of our inspection. The service can support up to 91 people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

The provider had a clear vision. High standards were expected, this was communicated clearly to the team by exceptionally strong leadership. The registered manager was totally committed to ensuring that people received the very best care. Staff were very complimentary about the support they received from the registered manager whose excellent clinical knowledge made staff feel assured and confident. Governance systems were in place to ensure there was clear oversight and scrutiny of practice within the home. The registered manager had developed strong partner agency working, we saw evidence of how this was directly improving the lives of people living in the home.

Systems and processes were in place to ensure people were protected from abuse. Risks were well managed, and people benefited from non-restrictive risk management processes. Staffing levels met the needs of the people living in the home. Processes were in place to support the safe recruitment of staff. Infection control was maintained to a good standard and people were protected from the risk of the spread of infection. Accidents and incidents were recorded, and subsequent analysis of incidents took place to ensure that lessons were learnt. Systems and processes were in place to ensure that people received their medicines safely.

People's needs were assessed thoroughly and in good detail. Peoples desired outcomes and wishes were recorded and cross referenced into the care plans. Staff received an induction and ongoing training. People were supported to receive the nutrition and hydration they needed to stay healthy. Observations of the dining experience during the inspection was positive with examples of attentive, kind and compassionate encouragement for people who needed support to eat and drink. People were supported to access a wide range of healthcare support. The service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People told us staff were kind and caring and our observations confirmed this. There was a homely feel throughout the home and there was a strong emphasis on the home being a ‘home’ for the people living there. Staff interactions with people were attentive and kind. People were given the opportunity to express their views regularly and were involved in their care. Privacy and dignity were maintained to a high standard.

People were receiving care that was responsive to their needs. Care planning captured peoples wishes, and care was delivered by staff who understood the needs of the people they were supporting. Care records were person centred and contained good detail about people. People knew how to complain and raise concerns and were listened to. People and relatives were surveyed to measure their satisfaction. Results from this were shared with people and relatives to ensure that they were aware of actions taken to respond to suggestions and comments.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published 05 December 2016)

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.