We carried out a review of the data available to us about Martin Hall Nursing Home 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 Martin Hall Nursing Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Martin Hall Nursing Home is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to 26 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The care home can accommodate 36 people in one purpose-built building. Included in the 36 beds are 12 transitional beds which are used to support people transfer from hospital to home.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Staff had access to personal protective equipment. However, we found staff were not consistently adhering to best practice guidance in the use of PPE. The service was clean and there were effective cleaning schedules in place being followed by the housekeeping staff.
Quality monitoring systems were in place.
Arrangements were in place to manage and administer people’s medicines safely.
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.
The risks to people’s care were assessed and measures were in place to mitigate these risks. Environmental factors had also been risk assessed.
People were supported with adequate numbers of staff. Staff had received training for their roles. New staff were recruited safely.
Staff knew how to keep people safe from abuse and were confident to raise concerns with the registered manager or external agencies. When required, notifications had been completed to inform us of events and incidents.
Staff were supported to raise issues and kept informed of changes to practice.
People and their relatives knew how to raise a complaint and would feel confident to do so if needed.
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 the service was good, published (18 May 2018).
Why we inspected
We received concerns in relation to staff practice. As a result, we undertook a focussed inspection to review the key questions of safe and well-led only.
We reviewed the information we held about the service. No areas of concern were identified in the other key questions. We therefore did not inspect them.
The overall rating for the service was good. This is based on the findings at this inspection.
We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to coronavirus and other infection outbreaks effectively.
Follow Up
We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
There was a registered manager in post. At the time of our inspection the current registered manager was in the process of de registering with CQC and a new manager who will be referred to in the report as ‘manager’ had been appointed who was in the process of registering with CQC. 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. In this report when we speak about both the company and the registered manager we refer to them as being, ‘the registered persons’.
The service had not previously been rated because this was the first inspection for the location under the new provider.
Guidance was in place to ensure people received their medicines when required. Medicines were managed administered safely.
Where people were unable to make decisions arrangements had been made to ensure decisions were made in people's best interests.
A system was in place to carry out suitable quality checks were being completed and actions taken where issues were identified. The provider had ensured that there were enough staff on duty. In addition, people told us that they received person-centred care.
There were systems, processes and practices to safeguard people from situations in which they may experience abuse including financial mistreatment. Risks to people’s safety had been assessed, monitored and managed so they were supported to stay safe while their freedom was respected. Background checks had been completed before new staff had been appointed.
The environment was clean. There were arrangements to prevent and control infections and lessons had been learned when things had gone wrong.
Staff had been supported to deliver care in line with current best practice guidance. People were helped to eat and drink enough to maintain a balanced diet. People had access to healthcare services so that they received on-going healthcare support.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. Staff supported them in the least restrictive ways possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion and they were given emotional support when needed. They had also been supported to express their views and be actively involved in making decisions about their care as far as possible. People had access to lay advocates if necessary. Confidential information was kept private.
Information was provided to people in an accessible manner. People had been supported to access activities and community facilities. The registered manager and manager recognised the importance of promoting equality and diversity. People’s concerns and complaints were listened and responded to in order to improve the quality of care. Arrangements were in place to support people at the end of their life.
The senior management team promoted a positive culture in the service that was focused upon achieving good outcomes for people. They had also taken steps to enable the service to meet regulatory requirements. Staff had been helped to understand their responsibilities to develop good team work and to speak out if they had any concerns. People, their relatives and members of staff had been consulted about making improvements in the service. The provider had put in place arrangements that were designed to enable the service to learn, innovate and ensure its sustainability. There were arrangements for working in partnership with other agencies to support the development of joined-up care.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.