Hendra House Residential Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has changed to outstanding. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently better than expected compared to similar services. People’s feedback described it as exceptional and distinctive.

This service scored 88 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, well-being and communication needs with them.

Before a person moved to the home comprehensive and person-centred assessments were carried out to ensure staff could meet their needs and aspirations. Information was gathered from a range of sources, which included the person, family members, and relevant healthcare professionals, to ensure a holistic understanding of needs. Care plans were developed based on these assessments and provided clear guidance for staff on how to deliver safe and effective care. Risks associated with identified needs were assessed and managed appropriately, with clear strategies in place to minimise harm. These included risks associated with mobility, personal care, nutrition, skin integrity and emotional well-being. Reviews were undertaken regularly, or sooner if needs changed, which ensured the care provided remained effective and appropriate to people’s needs. Prompt referrals were made to other health and social care professionals when required. For example, speech and language therapists, district nurses and mental health professionals.

The provider always planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation. They worked to develop evidence-based good practice and standards.

People’s care plans were exceptionally person centred. They detailed not only people’s needs but how they wanted to be supported and what was important to them. People and, where appropriate their relatives, were involved in planning and reviewing their care. One person said, “I am involved and in control. All the staff know me really well and what’s important to me. They are like family.” A relative told us, “The staff fully involve me and my [relative] in every aspect of the care provided. Communications are excellent and I am sent regular updates and photographs. I can’t fault anything.” People were supported by an exceptional team of staff, many of whom had worked at the home for many years. All the staff, irrespective of their role worked together to ensure the best possible outcomes for people. Communications between leaders and staff were excellent and through regular meetings, handovers and encrypted telephone messages, staff were kept informed about people, changes to legislation, best practice and other aspects of life at the home. A member of staff said, “It’s a very happy home. There is great teamwork and the management are brilliant. Communication is really good.”

Recognised tools were used to assess risks such as skin integrity, falls, eating and drinking, and health conditions. Where risks were identified, a plan of care was in place to manage and mitigate risks to people. Staff responded in a timely manner where concerns about a person’s health or well-being were identified. Staff were supported through a thorough training programme to deliver care in accordance with best practice. The majority of training was delivered by an external trainer at the home which staff were very positive about. This included areas such as dementia care, nutrition, falls prevention and medication management. In December 2025 the home was for the second time awarded the platinum award by Investors in People which is the highest level achievable. Investors In People is an internationally recognised accreditation for people management and employee well-being. Their report stated that the home had made further improvements on their outcomes which, ‘demonstrated how well your high-performance culture had been embedded and matured by everyone.’ The provider’s policies and procedures aligned to current best practice and required standards. These included nutrition and hydration, oral health and maintaining good health. In early 2026 the home had been nominated for the Excellence in Oral Care Award. This award focuses on recognising teams and individuals who prioritise mouth care as part of overall health, often adhering to the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines. NICE is an independent public body in the UK that provides national guidance, advice, and evidence-based recommendations to improve health and social care. The home was also part of the ‘Care to Smile’ initiative. ‘Care to Smile’ is a structured NHS initiative based on NICE guidelines that helps care homes improve oral hygiene and mouth care through training, tools, and ongoing support ultimately improving people’s health, dignity, and quality of life.

In 2025 and 2026 the home was rated as being in the top 20 of care homes in the West Midlands region. These awards are based on reviews from people, their families and friends on the carehome.co.uk website. In 2025 the home won the National Care Employer of the Year award. The National Care Awards are the largest awards recognising excellence in the UK care sector. The awards celebrate standout care providers, teams and individuals who are making a difference in care. This demonstrated the provider’s commitment to delivering the highest possible care in accordance with best practice.

The provider always worked well across teams and services to support people. They shared thorough assessments of people’s needs when they moved between different services, so people only needed to tell their story once.

Staff worked exceptionally well as a team and affectionately referred to themselves as ‘Team Hendra.’ Staff understood their roles and responsibilities and worked collaboratively to meet people’s assessed needs. This included all staff irrespective of their role. Staff told us this strong team ethos, training and effective communications enabled them to provide exceptional person-centred care to people. There were excellent links with healthcare professionals which were effective in ensuring people received the care needed, when needed and often reducing hospital admissions because any deterioration was identified and responded to quickly. A local GP visited the home each week. They were very positive about how staff worked effectively with them to ensure good outcomes for people and supported their clinical decision making. They told us, “I complete a ward round every Thursday morning at Hendra House Residential Home. I receive a ward round list outlining patients and their respective concerns. Following the ward round, I complete an email summary of the management plans and recommendations discussed for each resident. The management and care staff are consistently receptive to these recommendations, and, in my experience, they are implemented appropriately and acted upon in a timely manner.” Staff engaged with a range of other professionals which included community nurses, therapists, and social care teams, to support people’s health and wellbeing. Referrals were made in a timely manner where required, and professional advice was acted upon to ensure care remained effective and responsive. For example, we saw staff following the recommendations of the speech and language therapist for a person who required a modified diet. There were grab packs in place for each resident, including copies of their care plan, medication, and advanced healthcare decision documents and staff knew exactly where to go if they needed to find this information to support people moving between services. Staff accompanied people to appointments where required to ensure information about them was shared effectively. This meant people only had to tell their story once. This joined-up approach supported positive outcomes and reduced the risk of fragmented care. These examples demonstrated that staff and teams worked well together resulting in a seamless experience for people.

The provider always supported people to manage their health and well-being to fully maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Staff were proactive in supporting people to live healthier lives, placing a strong emphasis on prevention, well-being, and independence. People were empowered to be involved in decisions about their health and were encouraged to engage in activities and routines that promoted physical and emotional well-being. For example, 1 person expressed a desire to improve their mobility to enable them to attend a show in London later in the year as well as other activities outside of the home. The person has been encouraged to take ownership of their goals, supported to achieve their outcome and is now mobilising independently around the home whilst recognising their limitations and risks. Another person wanted to maintain their independence to use the stairs following an illness and with staff support this was achieved.

Staff supported people in accessing all necessary medical appointments and ongoing health monitoring, as well as input from occupational therapists and physiotherapists to assess and improve mobility. Stabilising people’s health and enabling their mobility contributed to people regaining as much independence as possible. For example, 1 person had a calliper attached to their footwear for many years and as their mobility declined, they required an additional mobility aid. After a discussion with the person, it became apparent the calliper was disabling them and causing a hindrance. With the consent of the person the care manager contacted the appropriate professionals resulting in new constructed footwear without a calliper. This was more dignified and meant the person had become more independent and able to wear clothing they had not been able to wear before. Mealtimes were clearly embedded as an important part of people’s daily lives, not just to meet nutritional needs but to promote enjoyment, social interaction, and well-being, reflecting the provider’s genuinely person-centred culture. People were very positive about the meals and choices provided. One person said, “The food is excellent and there are always choices. You can ask for anything really.” Staff sat and ate lunch with people which made the experience relaxed and sociable and encouraged people to eat more.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

There were systems in place to monitor people’s outcomes and to assess the effectiveness of care and support. Regular reviews of care plans and risk assessments were undertaken to ensure they remained accurate and reflective of people’s current needs. A local GP visited the home on a weekly basis to monitor, review and assess the health care needs of the people who lived there. Staff recorded and reported changes in people’s health and well-being, enabling timely action to be taken where concerns were identified. Outcomes were monitored through a range of methods, including daily records, reviews, and feedback from people and those important to them. This information was used to make appropriate adjustments to care and support, ensuring positive outcomes were maintained and risks were reduced.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

People told us they were treated with respect and their wishes were respected. One person said, “I can get up and go to bed when I like. If I wanted a siesta in the afternoon, they [staff] wouldn’t mind at all.” Another person told us, “It couldn’t be better. The staff are lovely and I can do as I please. Staff always check with me before helping me. They don’t force me to do anything.” During our visits we saw people choosing where and how to spend their time which was respected by staff. A visiting professional said, “Through my observations I have always seen staff ask for people’s consent before they do anything. I can’t fault them.” Staff had been trained about the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and understood the importance of respecting people’s wishes. There were systems in place to ensure that those making decisions about the care and support people received had the legal authority to do so. Deprivation of Liberty (DoLS) authorisations and applications were in place for people who required this level of support to keep them safe and meet their needs. Although best interest discussions had taken place, these had not always been formally documented. This was discussed at the time, and the registered manager gave their assurances that a formal record of all conversations would be maintained.