We carried out a review of the data available to us about Hindson 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 Hindson House, you can give feedback on this service.
At our last inspection we rated the service as overall Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
At this inspection we found the service remained rated overall as Good.
At our last inspection in December 2015 we found that the provider did not provide full employment histories for all of their staff. This was a breach of Regulation 19 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. At this inspection we found that the provider had taken action to meet the requirements of the regulation. Full employment histories were provided for all staff.
People were kept safe from the risk of harm and abuse. Staff were appropriately trained and robust reporting systems were in place. Risks to people were assessed and monitored effectively.
Sufficient numbers of staff were deployed to meet people’s needs. Medicines were stored, recorded and administered safely and risk assessments were in place to keep people safe and support their wellbeing.
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 supporte this practice.
Staff were trained to support people according to their needs, choices and preferences. Care plans and risk assessments were regularly reviewed and contained personalised information to support people’s needs. Staff worked in partnership with health and social care professionals to promote people’s health and wellbeing.
Staff had developed respectful, caring relationships with people and involved them in making decisions about their care.
Care and support was planned so that it met people’s needs and reflect their choices, capabilities and preferences. There was a complaints policy in place and a range of communication methods were used to support people to express concerns.
The registered manager promoted a person centred, caring culture which was shared by staff. Robust systems were in place for monitoring quality within the service. Feedback gathered was used to drive improvements in the service and meet people’s requests. There was a calm and positive atmosphere within the home and it was obvious that people enjoyed being there.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
This inspection was unannounced and took place on the 2 and 3 December 2015.
Hindson House is a residential care home which provides residential respite care for up to six adults with physical and learning disabilities. The care home comprised of one floor, was wheelchair accessible and set in its own secure gardens. Over the two days of the inspection six people were used the service.
Hindson House has a registered manager in post. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
Recruitment procedures were not fully completed to ensure people were protected from the employment of unsuitable care staff. This is a requirement of the regulations to ensure that appropriate checks have been completed for new staff which include obtaining a full employment history from the time they left full time education. The provider however obtained suitable references to ensure care staff’s suitability for their role. New care staff induction training was followed by a period of time working with experienced colleagues to ensure they had the skills and confidence required to support people safely. There were sufficient care staff employed to ensure that people’s individual needs were met.
Relatives of people using the service told us they felt their family members were kept safe. Care staff understood and followed the provider’s guidance to enable them to recognise and address any safeguarding concerns about people.
People’s safety was promoted because risks that may cause them harm had been identified and managed. People were supported by care staff who encouraged them to remain independent. Appropriate risk assessments were in place to keep people safe.
Contingency plans were in place to ensure the safe delivery of people’s care in the event of adverse situations such as large scale care staff sickness and fire or floods. Fire drills were documented, understood by care staff and practiced to ensure people were kept safe. The registered manager and deputy manager were also trained care staff who were able to be deployed to deliver care if required.
People were protected from the unsafe administration of medicines. Care staff responsible for supporting people with their medicines had received additional training to ensure people’s medicines were administered, stored and disposed of correctly. Care staff skills in medicines management were reviewed by the manager to ensure they remained competent to continue.
People, where possible, were supported by care staff to make their own decisions. Care staff were knowledgeable about the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005. The service worked with people, relatives and social care professionals when required to assess people’s capacity to make specific decisions for themselves. Care staff sought people’s consent before delivering care and support. Documentation showed people’s decisions to receive care had been appropriately assessed, respected and documented.
Care staff received an effective induction into Hindson House and completed the provider’s mandatory training to ensure that they had the skills and knowledge required to support people effectively.
People were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet. We saw that people were able to choose their meals and they enjoyed what was provided. Records showed people’s food and drink preferences were documented in their care plans and were understood by care staff. People at risk of malnutrition and dehydration were assessed to ensure their needs were being met.
People’s health needs were met as the care staff and the registered manager promptly engaged with healthcare agencies and professionals to ensure people’s identified health care needs were met and to maintain people’s safety and welfare.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. Appropriate applications had been submitted to the relevant supervisory body to ensure people were not being unlawfully restricted.
Care staff demonstrated they knew and understood the needs of the people they were supporting. Relatives told us they were happy with the care provided. The registered manager and care staff were able to identify and discuss the importance of maintaining people’s dignity and privacy at all times. People were encouraged and supported by care staff to make choices about their care including how they spent their day.
People had care plans which were personalised to their needs and wishes. They contained detailed information to assist care staff to provide care in a manner that respected each person’s individual requirements and promoted treating people with dignity. Relatives told us and records showed they were encouraged to be involved at the care planning stage, during reviews and when their family members’ health needs changed.
Relatives knew how to complain and told us they would do so if required. Procedures were in place for the registered manager to monitor, investigate and respond to complaints in an effective way. Relatives and care staff were encouraged to provide feedback on the quality of the service during regular meetings with care staff and the registered manager as well as the completion of customer satisfaction questionnaires. Information was made available in alternative formats to allow people receiving the service to express their concerns or complaints.
The provider’s values of care were communicated to people and understood by care staff. People told us and we saw these standards were evidenced in the way that care was delivered.
The registered manager and care staff promoted a culture which focused on providing individual person centred care. People were assisted by care staff who encouraged them to raise concerns with them and the registered manager. The provider had a routine and regular monitoring quality monitoring process in place to assess the quality of the service being provided.
Relatives told us and we saw that the home had confident leadership and staff told us they felt supported by the registered manager.
We found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.