• Hospice service

Archived: Fair Havens Community Hospice Service

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Heath Centre, Daws Heath Road, Thundersley, Benfleet, Essex, SS7 2LH

Provided and run by:
Havens Hospices

Important: This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 8 February 2019

Fair Havens Community Hospice Service is operated by Havens Christian Hospice. The service has been registered by the CQC since March 2017. The service provides a hospice at home service and a managed care service. The hospice at home service provides planned and crisis respite support for patients living in Castle Point, Rochford and Southend. The managed care service provides continuing health care to patients approaching the end of life, living in Castle Point and Rochford.

The service has had a registered manager in post since March 2017. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC to manage the service. They have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated regulations about how the service is run.

The service is registered to provide treatment of disease, disorder or injury.

Fair Havens Community Hospice Service had not been inspected before. We inspected the service on 29 November 2018 and our inspection was announced at short notice, to ensure that everyone we needed to talk to was available.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 8 February 2019

Fair Havens Community Hospice Service is operated by Havens Christian Hospice. The service provides community hospice care across Essex.

We inspected this service using our comprehensive inspection methodology. Our inspection was announced 48 hours prior to the inspection, to ensure that everyone we needed to talk to was available. The service was inspected on 29 November 2018.

To get to the heart of patients’ experiences of care and treatment, we ask the same five questions of all services: are they safe, effective, caring, responsive to people's needs, and well-led? Where we have a legal duty to do so we rate services’ performance against each key question as outstanding, good, requires improvement or inadequate.

Throughout the inspection, we took account of what people told us and how the provider understood and complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

   

Services we rate

We rated this service as Good overall because:

  • Staff kept patients safe from harm and abuse. Risks were assessed, monitored and managed appropriately.

  • Staff followed best practice in relation to infection prevention and control. The maintenance and use of equipment kept people safe.

  • Care and treatment records were accurate, stored securely and provided comprehensive details of care and treatment.

  • Staff recognised incidents and knew how to report them. Managers investigated incidents and made improvements to the service.

  • Staff had the appropriate skills, training, knowledge and experience to deliver effective care and treatment.

  • Staff delivered care and treatment in line with evidence-based practice.

  • Information about the outcomes of patient care and treatment was routinely collected and monitored.

  • Staff involved patients and carers in decisions about their care and treatment.

  • Staff cared for patients with compassion, treating them with dignity and respect.

  • The service was planned based on the needs of local people, and new initiatives were set up to improve the service.

  • There were clear processes for staff to manage complaints and concerns.

  • There was an open and transparent culture, with engaged and experienced leadership.

However, we also found the following issues that the service provider needs to improve:

  • Learning from incidents was not consistently shared amongst staff.

  • Progress was not documented on the community risk register; therefore, it was unclear which items had been reviewed and remained a risk.

  

Following this inspection, we told the provider that it should make improvements, even though a regulation had not been breached, to help the service improve. Details are at the end of the report.

Amanda Stanford

Deputy Chief Inspector of Hospitals