Hunningley Grange Residential Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

The decoration and service design did not provide a homely feel and there was a lack of person-centred care for people. There was a lack of stimulation, activities and community engagement. There was little feedback gained from people about their care and support and how this could be improved for them. People were not provided with information tailored to their needs. The new manager had recognised these concerns and plans were in place to improve activities, the environment and engagement with people.

This service scored 39 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Improvements were required to ensure people were involved in their care and support and staff worked in partnership with them. There was a lack of systems in place to gain peoples feedback or involve them in their care planning. One person said, “I would like to visit where I used to live, but I haven’t been able to.” A relative said, “[Name] watches Tv and nothing else.”

Staff were mostly positive about the changes being made in the service. They told us plans were in place to improve things for people. A staff member said,” We know what jobs are expected now. We have a daily handover. Since the new manager came in, things have got better.”

The environment did not provide a homely feel, as several areas were in disrepair, visibly dirty and required redecoration. We found several rooms to be cold and water temperatures fluctuated to bedroom taps. However, we did find people had personal effects and things which were important to them in their own rooms.

Whilst we found little community engagement for people, some people attended a local activity day centre. One person said, “I go to the centre twice a week.” One person told us they wished to move placements, better suited to their needs. The manager told us they had communicated this to the persons social worker. However, this person told us they had expressed a wish to move for a long period of time.

The manager told us agency staff were only utilised in emergency situations, meaning people were mostly supported by a core staff team. Staff had access to care records via an online system and recorded peoples care using handheld devices. However, improvements were required to ensure care plans contained enough detail to guide staff and staff were aware of how to utilise the online system.

We received negative feedback from partners about how the service provided care and support to people.

Care records were appropriately stored in line with confidentiality and GDPR requirements.

Improvements were required about how staff provided information to people. We observed staff struggling to interact with people who were hard of hearing. Staff did not spend valuable time with people to help them interact, communicate or understand. One person who had poor sight was provided with talking books which they could listen to.

Staff told us communication could be improved for some people who were hard of hearing, such as providing them with written information and pictures, which would further enable them to understand and make choices.

There was a lack of dementia friendly signage around the home and a lack of personalised bedroom door signage. Meaning people living with dementia may struggle to orientate themselves around the service. Communication care plans were in place and detailed people's needs.

Improvements were required about how staff listened to and involved people. One person was unsure who the manager was and told us they would raise a concern with another member of staff if they needed to, they told us, “Depends what had gone off (who they would speak to).”

Staff told us things were improving for people. One staff said, “It is much better now, things are moving in the right direction.” And another staff said, “Communication is better.”

We found gaps in complaints records, however a new complaints log was in situ. There was a lack of systems in place to ensure people had opportunities to raise concerns or suggestions. However this had recently improved and service user meetings had taken place, with plans to complete these regularly in the future.

The new leadership team had recently improved how people accessed support and treatment when they needed it. People were supported from external professionals, such as GP's, and people had recently undergone continence and SALT assessments. District nurse teams also visited the home to carry out any clinical care needs.

Staff told us they supported people to access healthcare where required. One staff member said, “The GP comes in weekly, we have a good relationship with them.”

We received some feedback from partners about how the service was accessing treatment for people, this feedback was negative. However, at the time of our inspection we found this concern had been rectified.

Records evidenced people had referrals made to external professionals where required. Care records required some improvements, to ensure robust plans were in place to guide staff following healthcare assessments.

There was a lack of activities and stimulation for people. People told us they were bored. One person said, “There is nothing to do. We did have some dominoes somewhere, but they have disappeared.” Another person said, “Sometimes we are asked what we want to do, but then others want to do something else.”

Staff told us more activities were needed for people. One staff member said, “There isn’t enough to do. I know we are recruiting for an activities co-ordinator.”

It could not be evidenced people had been involved in choosing activities. The provider was currently recruiting an activities co-ordinator, however at the time of our inspection, systems were not in place to provide people with things to do, which were important to the. We also observed TV in lounge areas to be faulty.

One person wished to move placements in the future, this had been communicated to us during a previous inspection and still remained a concern for this person. They told us, “I have had it up to here with this place, I want to live in supported living, with people who are more like me.” We did find this person had previous involvement with their social worker about this and the service had also made recent contact with their social worker.

During our inspection we spoke to the manager about one person who wished to move from the service and the manager assured us they had discussed this with the person’s social worker. The manager showed us records which detailed where people had ‘Do not Resuscitate’ plans in place.

Records were in place relating to caring for people at the end of their life. However, these required more person-centred detail, to ensure they captured peoples wishes and what was important to them. Where people had Lasting Power of Attorney’s (LPA’s) this was detailed in their care records.