We carried out a review of the data available to us about Hallmark Anya Court Luxury Care 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 Hallmark Anya Court Luxury Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Staff were trained in safeguarding and understood their responsibilities to report potential safeguarding concerns. There were enough staff to ensure people’s needs were met safely. We were assured by the provider’s infection, prevention and control practices. Visiting to the care home aligned with government guidance. Environmental risks were identified and mitigated against, and medicines were well managed.
New staff received an induction into the service and received ongoing training to keep their skills and knowledge up to date. The registered manager worked with trusted assessors to ensure any admissions from hospital or the community could be supported safely. Staff understood people’s individual dietary needs and prompted people to eat and drink enough to meet their needs. The provider had adapted the design and decoration of the building to meet people’s needs. 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. Partnership working enabled people to maintain their wellbeing.
Important events and incidents were notified to CQC, and the latest CQC rating was displayed in the home as per regulatory requirements. The provider worked with external health and social care professionals to ensure people had access to services they needed, in response to changes in their health and to improve their health outcomes. People knew how to raise concerns and provide feedback about the service. The management team worked together to identify areas for improvement at the home.
Rating at last inspection
The last comprehensive inspection report for Anya Court (published January 2020) and we gave a rating of requires improvement. At this inspection we found the service had improved and have rated the service as good.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.
We undertook this focused inspection to check they had improved and to confirm they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to the Key Questions Safe, Effective and Well-led which contain those requirements. For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating. The overall rating for the service has improved to 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 COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.
Anya Court accommodates people in one building, divided into three separate units. Each unit had communal spaces such as lounge areas and dining areas. The home also had communal spaces in the centre of the building for everyone to share including a coffee lounge and cinema. There were garden spaces and visiting suites available outside the main building for people and their families to use. People at the home had en-suite facilities in their bedrooms.
We found the following examples of good practice.
Visitors were welcomed to the home. Staff were observed to be approachable and caring. The home was clean and welcoming. The provider offered people the use of their coffee lounge, where snacks and drinks were on offer to everyone in the home including visitors.
People received regular visits from their relatives and friends, in accordance with government guidance. The provider had built visiting suites and developed garden areas to encourage visitors to see their relatives in a safe environment where they could exercise social distancing. However, the provider also encouraged people to visit their relatives in their bedrooms and communal areas of the home whenever this was possible.
The provider offered families the opportunity to undertake training in how they could support their relatives when they visited, and in the role of an essential care giver.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People’s relatives and staff gave us mixed feedback about whether there were enough staff available to always respond to people’s needs. People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice. The registered manager addressed this during our inspection visit.
People using the service did not consistently receive support from a well led service. The service was led by a registered manager who had been appointed to the home five months before our visit. However, there had been an inconsistent management team and staff team since our previous inspection, which had impacted on the leadership and consistency of the quality of care people received.
People felt safe at Anya Court. Staff were provided with guidance about how to keep people safe. Environmental risks were identified and mitigated against, and medicines were well managed. |Partnership working enabled people to maintain their wellbeing.
People received kind, responsive person-centred care from staff. Staff respected people’s privacy. Overall, people and their relatives were involved in planning their care and support. The staff team worked to promote people’s dignity and prevent people from becoming socially isolated within the home.
People knew how to raise concerns and provide feedback about the service. The provider ensured people received care at the end of their life, which met their wishes.
There were additional managers of departments, and a deputy manager who supported the registered manager. The new management team worked together to identify areas for improvement at the home.
Rating at last inspection
The last comprehensive inspection report for Anya Court (published June 2017) and we gave a rating of Good in all areas. At this inspection we found the service had deteriorated and have rated the service as requires improvement.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection. During our inspection visit we looked at a notification of a specific incident where a person had developed an injury. This incident is currently being investigated. As a result, this inspection did not examine the circumstances of the incident. The information CQC received about the incident indicated concerns around the safety of people at the home. This inspection examined those risks.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.
This inspection visit took place on the 3 and 4 May 2017 and was unannounced. At the last inspection in May 2015 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
A requirement of the service’s registration is that they have 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. There was not a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. The previous registered manager had left the service in February 2017. The provider had appointed an interim manager to manage the service whilst a new registered manager was recruited. A new manager had been appointed in March 2017 and was in their new role when we inspected the service. They had already started their application process to apply for their registration with CQC. We refer to the new manager as the manager in the body of this report.
There were enough staff available to safeguard the health, safety and welfare of people. Staff were given induction and training so they had the skills required to meet the needs of people living at the home. People were protected against the risk of abuse as the provider took appropriate steps to recruit staff of good character, and staff knew how to protect people from harm.
The manager and staff understood their responsibility to comply with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Decisions were made in people’s ‘best interests’ where they could not make decisions for themselves.
Care staff treated people with respect and dignity, and supported people to maintain their privacy and independence. People made their own choices about who visited them at the home. This helped people maintain personal relationships with people in their community.
People were provided with food and drink that met their health needs and their preferences. People were supported to access healthcare professionals to maintain their health and wellbeing.
People were offered opportunities to take part in interests and hobbies that met their individual needs.
People knew how to give feedback to the management team, or make a complaint if they needed to. Quality assurance procedures identified where the service needed to make improvements, and where issues had been identified the manager and provider took action to continuously improve the service.
We inspected Anya Court on 6 May 2015 as an unannounced inspection. This was the first time the service had been inspected.
Anya Court is divided into three separate floors and provides personal and nursing care for up to 70 older people, including people living with dementia. There were 23 people living at Anya Court when we inspected the service.
A requirement of the service’s registration is that they have 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. There was not a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. The previous registered manager had left in March 2015. The provider had appointed a general manager to manage the service whilst a new registered manager was recruited. Recruitment was taking place in a timely way. The general manager is referred to as ‘the manager’ in the body of this report.
There were enough staff available to safeguard the health, safety and welfare of people. Staff were given induction and training so they had the skills required to meet the needs of people living at the home.
People were protected against the risk of abuse as the provider took appropriate steps to recruit staff of good character, and staff knew how to protect people from harm. The provider had appropriate policies and procedures so staff understood how to report allegations of abuse.
The manager understood their responsibility to comply with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Decisions were made in people’s ‘best interests’ where they could not make decisions for themselves.
People were provided with food and drink that met their health needs and their preference. People were supported to access healthcare professionals to maintain their health and wellbeing.
Care staff treated people with respect and dignity, and supported people to maintain their privacy and independence.
People made choices about who visited them at the home. This helped people maintain personal relationships with people in their community. People were supported to take part in interests and hobbies that met their preference.
People knew how to make a complaint if they needed to. Complaints were fully investigated and analysed so that the provider could learn from them.
People who used the service and their relatives were given the opportunity to share their views on how the service was run. Quality assurance procedures identified where the service needed to make improvements, and where issues had been identified the manager took action to continuously improve the service.