You are here

Hendra House Residential Home Outstanding

We are carrying out checks at Hendra House Residential Home using our new way of inspecting services. We will publish a report when our check is complete.

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 12 October 2015

The inspection was carried out on 30 July 2015 and was unannounced. At our previous inspection on 22 May 2014 we found that they were meeting the Regulations we assessed them against.

Hendra House is a care home that provides accommodation and personal care for up to 28 older people. There was 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.

Staff were very well trained and used their training effectively to support people. People said they were aware of the training that staff were given. The registered manager had also provided training events for people who used the service.

Staff understood and worked within the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff were able to demonstrate an excellent understanding and knowledge of people’s specific support needs, so as to ensure people’s safety and protect their human rights.

People told us they felt safe at Hendra House and were protected from abuse. Staff knew how to identify if people were at risk of harm and knew what to do to ensure they were protected.

Staff were recruited through a rigorous procedure. People and their relatives spoke extremely positively about the home and the care they or their relatives received. Staff took time to talk with people or provide group or individual activities.

People had care centred upon them because of strong leadership and good staff support. The management reviewed their business plan every month to determine if the service they intended to provide was still relevant to people’s needs. Staff reflected on their care of people so they discussed what worked well and what they could do better for them.

People had their individual needs met. We saw staff knew people well and provided personalised support very quickly when asked. There was sufficient food and drink available and people ate their meals in a calm, sociable and unhurried atmosphere.

People had regular routine access to visiting health and social care professionals where necessary. District nurses or the GP assessed the initial health needs of people. They provided clear guidance for staff about how they were to meet these needs so that they worked in collaboration. Staff responded to people’s changing health needs and sought the appropriate guidance or care by healthcare professionals. Medicines were managed safely to ensure people received them in accordance with their health needs and prescriber’s instructions.

Staff identified and reported any concerns relating to a person’s safety and welfare. The registered manager had a system to respond to all concerns or complaints appropriately.

The senior management, staff and relatives regularly discussed how to best support people living at the home. The provider also subscribed to an external customer satisfaction feedback scheme. This enabled people and their relatives to comment on the service independently. People and staff were extremely complimentary about the registered manager and their leadership. The registered manager had fully taken on board the changes to guidance and legislation since April 2015 and integrated these into the systems of the service. The provider had on display the many accolades awarded by accredited schemes.

Inspection areas



Updated 12 October 2015

The service was safe.

The provider supported people safely.

Staff knew how to recognise and report allegations of abuse.

People’s medicines were administered in accordance with the instructions of the prescriber by staff that were trained and competent to do so.

The provider operated a rigorous recruitment and selection procedure.



Updated 12 October 2015

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff and external advocates in regards to their ability to make decisions.

Staff received regular supervision and training relevant to their roles.

People were supported to eat and drink well to help them maintain optimum health.



Updated 12 October 2015

The service was caring.

People were treated with compassion, respect and dignity.

People who lived at the home were encouraged to be involved in the planning and reviewing of their care by dedicated staff who knew them well.

People were listened to and their privacy was respected.



Updated 12 October 2015

The service was responsive.

People who lived at the home and their relatives were confident to raise concerns. People received care that met their individual health and social needs based on equality and diversity.

There was a good provision of activities that promoted peoples hobbies and interests and family inclusion.



Updated 12 October 2015

The service was well led.

The provider worked with external consultants to monitor and develop the service and to keep up with good practice.

People who lived at the service, their relatives and staff considered the leadership of the registered manager was very supportive and family orientated.

The provider had a clear strategic vision set out in the business plan. There was an open and empowering culture in the home.