Archived: Hannah Levy House Trust

Updated 3 December 2020

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

We received information of concern about infection control and prevention measures at this service. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 6 November 2020 and was announced.

Updated 3 December 2020

Hannah Levy House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The home is registered to accommodate a maximum of 34 people who require personal care. There were 27 people living there at the time of our inspection. The home does not provide nursing care. The provider is a charitable trust which is run by a board of trustees. Hannah Levy House provides care for Jewish people in a Kosher environment with facilities to meet their religious, spiritual and cultural needs.

The home was led by a registered manager. 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.

At our last inspection we rated the service 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.

Is the service safe?

People were protected from potential abuse and avoidable harm by staff who were knowledgeable about abuse and safeguarding procedures. Risks to people were managed so that the service was as safe as possible. There were enough appropriately qualified staff available on each shift to ensure people were cared and supported safely. Medicines were managed safely and effectively. People were protected by the prevention and control of infection. There was a system in place to review and learn from incidents when things went wrong.

Is the service effective?

Staff received training to meet the needs of people accommodated. People told us staff were skilled and well trained. Staff said they were well supported to carry out their roles and told us everyone worked very well together as a team for the benefit of the people. People’s needs were fully assessed and they had access to the specialist health care professionals who worked closely with the staff at the service. 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 supported this practice. People had access to nutritious, home cooked food that they enjoyed and were given choice in their menu selections. People's independence and wellbeing was enhanced by the environment of the home with improvement being made.

Is the service caring?

People and staff were relaxed and comfortable with each other. People were supported with kindness and compassion by staff who knew them and understood the care they needed. There were processes in place to ensure people did not experience discrimination in relation to their care and support. People were treated with dignity and respect and were supported to make their own choices.

Is the service responsive?

People received personalised care and support and in the ways they preferred. Staff took the time to get to know people and their life and social histories so they could provide appropriate activities and keep people meaningfully occupied. People knew how to complain if they needed to and there was a clear complaints process available.

Is the service well led?

The management team that was approachable and respected by the people, relatives, professionals and staff. People, their relatives and staff were consulted and involved in their care and support. There was a programme of quality checks and audits to ensure the quality of the service was maintained with an emphasis on seeking continual improvement.