Anley Hall Nursing Home

Updated 2 March 2022

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to care homes with outbreaks of COVID-19, we are conducting reviews to ensure that the Infection Prevention and Control (IPC) practice is safe and that services are compliant with IPC measures. This was a targeted inspection looking at the IPC practices the provider has in place. We also asked the provider about any staffing pressures the service was experiencing and whether this was having an impact on the service.

This inspection took place on 2 February 2022 and was announced. We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection.

Updated 2 March 2022

Anley Hall is registered to provide nursing care for up to 54 people, some of who may suffer from memory impairment, dementia, a physical disability or be terminally ill. The service is divided into two separate units; one is specifically used for people who are living with dementia. The service is a stone built country house, previously a private dwelling and is situated in a rural setting on the outskirts of the market town of Settle in the Yorkshire Dales. There are communal areas for dining and relaxation. Car parking is available in the grounds. On the day of our inspection 46 people were living in the service.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 16 August 2017 and was unannounced. At the last comprehensive inspection in May 2015, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

The service was safe. Care staff had received training to ensure they knew how to recognise and report potential abuse. Risks to people were identified and these were monitored to enable trends to be identified and plans developed to help manage these from reoccurring. There were sufficient numbers of care staff available to meet people’s needs. Medicines were managed in a safe way and checks were carried out to ensure care staff were competent to administer people’s medication.

The service was effective. Care staff were provided with a range of training, and development opportunities to enable them to effectively support people's needs. Whilst staff had not always received regular professional supervision, plans were in place to address this in the future. People were assisted to have maximum choice and control of their lives and care staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. A variety of food and drinks were provided to enable people to have choices about their meals to ensure their nutritional needs were appropriately supported and maintained. People's medical needs were supported with input from relevant health care professionals when this was required.

The service was caring. People were treated with dignity and respect by care staff who provided their support in a caring, kind and compassionate manner. People and their relatives were included in decisions about the way their support was provided. People were able to live their lives how they chose, although some relatives wished care staff would spend more time engaging with people.

The service was responsive. People received their support in an individualised way, which was personalised to meet their needs. A variety of opportunities were provided for people to enable them to have meaningful social interaction and reduce potential risks of social isolation. People’s care plans were evaluated and reviewed to ensure they accurately reflected their wishes and preferences. People were happy with the service delivered and were able to raise their concerns and have these investigated and where possible resolved.

The service was well-led. The service had an open and inclusive culture and people, their relatives and staff were positive about the way it was managed. People’s opinions and views about the service were valued and considered to enable the service to learn and develop. A range of systems were available to enable the quality of service people received to be assessed and monitored to help the service to continually improve.