You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 1 July 2016

This inspection took place on 25 and 26 April 2016. This was unannounced on the 25 April 2016, announced on 26 April 2016 and completed by one inspector.

Hallaton Manor is a service that provides accommodation for up to 41 people. There were 39 people who used the service at the time of these inspections. The service is set on two levels and had a lift and stairs for access. There was a large garden area and the property is in the centre of farm land , so therefore offers extensive field views for people to enjoy.

There was a registered manager at the service. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People told us that they felt safe at the Hallaton Manor and, in the main, systems and routines supported the safety of people. Medication was stored and recorded in line with guidelines, however, staff were often interrupted during the administration of medicines. This posed a potential risk of a medication error occurring during this time.

The records we reviewed showed that risks associated with people’s care and support had been assessed and actions had been taken to minimise such risks.

People’s needs were assessed prior to them moving into the service and plans of care were developed from this initial assessment. People were involved in decisions about their care and support.

People had been involved in making day to day decisions about their care and support. People also felt that there were currently enough members of staff on duty to meet their care and support needs. People visiting the service also confirmed this.

Staff knew about the needs of the people that they supported and people had access to specialist healthcare advice, when they needed it.

Whilst there were times when we observed people being treated in a kind and caring manner, there were other times when they were not.

Checks had been carried out when new members of staff had been employed. This was to check that they were suitable to work at the service. The staff team had received training relevant to their role within the service and ongoing support had been provided.

Staff meetings and meetings for people who used the service and their relatives were regularly held. This provided people with the opportunity to be involved in how the service was run.

The staff team felt supported by the manager and senior members of staff. They also felt able to speak out about any concern they may have had of any kind.

People’s nutritional and dietary requirements were assessed and a balanced diet was provided, with a choice of meal at each mealtime. Monitoring charts used to monitor people’s food and fluid intake were maintained when these were needed. Whilst the majority of people had a good experience at meal times, We found that some people who did not.

There were systems in place to regularly monitor the service that was provided and these had been effective in the identification of areas that required any action. Any required actions had been planned, monitored and the outcomes recorded

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 1 July 2016

The service was consistently safe.

The service had assessed the risks to people’s safety. People received their medicines as they had been prescribed and these were stored appropriately.

Background checks had been carried out when new member’s of staff had been employed. There were enough staff to provided appropriate support for people.

Staff knew how to reduce the risk of people experiencing abuse.

Effective

Good

Updated 1 July 2016

The service was effective.

Staff knew about the needs of the people that they supported and people had access to specialist healthcare advice, when they needed it.

People were cared for by staff who were trained and had the knowledge and skills they needed to provide support for older people.

Staff demonstrated an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) when supporting people who lacked capacity to make decisions for themselves about their care.

Caring

Good

Updated 1 July 2016

The service was caring.

People were involved in making decisions about their care and staff responded when they asked for help.

Staff were kind and attentive. People’s privacy and dignity were respected.

People told us that the staff listened to them and offered choices.

Responsive

Good

Updated 1 July 2016

The service was responsive.

People’s individual needs had been assessed, planned and reviewed with them to make sure they were met, and the staff knew how they wished to be cared for.

Activities were regularly provided, these included the development of areas within the service as well as access to activities within the community.

People told us that they raised any concerns they had with the staff and manager. Concerns and complaints were recorded and dealt with quickly, with acceptable outcomes.

Well-led

Good

Updated 1 July 2016

The service was well-led.

People knew who members of the management team were. Staff were happy working at the service and were able to offer suggestions about the way care and support was provided.

Staff and visitors knew the manager, who was visible around the service and they were able to discuss matters at any time.