We carried out a review of the data available to us about Haydon View Residential 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 Haydon View Residential Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Haydon View is a residential care home providing personal care for up to 27 people. The service provides support to older people including those who may be living with a dementia and/or a physical disability. At the time of our inspection there were 23 people using the service.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People told us they were cared for by extremely kind and caring staff. The home was clean and tidy, and staff followed infection control procedures. A small number of staff needed reminding of PPE procedures which the provider addressed immediately.
Medicines were well managed. The provider had made great improvements since our last inspection.
Any risks identified had been assessed to keep people as safe as possible. Any incidents were recorded and monitored in order to reduce further instances occurring. The home had a good refurbishment programme in place and a new maintenance person to take this forward.
Enough staff were employed to care for people they way they preferred and safe recruitment practices were in place.
A range of quality assurance checks took place to monitor the service delivered to people.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update
The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 22 February 2022) and there were breaches of regulation. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve.
At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.
Why we inspected
We carried out an unannounced focussed inspection of this service on 25 January 2022. Breaches of legal requirements were found. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve, safe care and treatment and quality assurance.
We undertook this focused inspection to check they had followed their action plan and to confirm they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to the Key Questions safe and well-led which contain those requirements.
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.
For the key question of Effective, Caring and Responsive which were not inspected, we used the rating awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating. The overall rating for the service has changed to good. This is based on the findings at this inspection.
You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Haydon View on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
Haydon View Residential Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 27 people, some of whom were living with a dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 24 people living at the home.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Infection control and medicines management procedures needed to be improved. Infection control and medicines optimisations teams were contacted to offer additional support.
Quality assurance checks and procedures had not always found the issues we had during the inspection. The registered manager acted on many of the suggestions we made, but further work was required.
People were cared for in a warm and homely environment. People and relatives commented on how all staff were very kind and extremely caring and we witnessed this throughout the inspection.
People felt safe and were protected from abuse. There was enough dedicated staff working at the service to meet people’s individual needs and recruitment processes were robust.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update
The last rating for this service was good (published on 28 February 2018).
Why we inspected
This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service. This included information that the home was currently in a COVID-19 outbreak.
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. This included checking the provider was meeting COVID-19 vaccination requirements.
We inspected and found there was a concern with infection control, so we widened the scope of the inspection to become a focused inspection which included the key questions of Safe and Well-Led.
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 changed from good to requires improvement based on the findings of this inspection. We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements. Please see the Safe and Well-Led key questions sections of this full report.
You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Haydon View Residential Home on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Enforcement
We are mindful of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our regulatory function. This meant we took account of the exceptional circumstances arising as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic when considering what enforcement action was necessary and proportionate to keep people safe as a result of this inspection. We will continue to monitor the service and will take further action if needed.
We have identified breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 in relation to infection control, medicines and governance of the service.
Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.
Follow up
We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
This inspection took place on 17 November 2017. The inspection was unannounced.
The last inspection we carried out at this service was in August 2015 when we rated the service 'Good', and found the provider was meeting all of the regulations. At this inspection, we found the provider had maintained a rating of 'Good'.
A registered manager was in place. 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.
People we spoke with were relaxed in the home, and at ease with staff. People told us they felt safe living at the home. Staff had all undertaken training in spotting any signs of safeguarding concerns, and in discussions with us were able to describe appropriate steps they would follow if any arose. Prompt referrals had been made to the local authority safeguarding team when necessary.
Risks were well managed. Care records contained assessments of risks such as falling, choking or developing malnutrition. Mitigating actions were highlighted to staff to reduce any known risks. Some areas of the upper floor were sloping and we considered more could be done to reduce the risk of people tripping. The registered manager assured us this would be addressed. Accidents and incidents were well monitored.
People and staff told us there were enough staff to operate the home safely and to meet people's needs. Staff were had time to sit and talk with people as well as carrying out their tasks. Robust recruitment procedures had been maintained, and recruitment included checking prospective staff employment details with the Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) which would highlight any known reasons why staff should not work with vulnerable people.
.
Staff received appropriate training so they had the skills and knowledge to meet the needs of the people they supported. Training was monitored to ensure it stayed up to date. Staff met regularly with their supervisors to discuss their role and personal development.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
The principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) were embedded in care records, and staff had a good understanding of the process to follow if they had any concerns over people's capacity to make decisions. Where people’s liberty had been restricted for their own safety, the registered manager had applied for authorisation through the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).
People spoke positively about the food on offer, and during our observations, we saw people enjoyed their meals. Some adaptations had been made to the environment to enable people living with dementia to move around the home as independently as possible. The provider told us they were researching best practice in dementia care and had plans to incorporate more adaptations to make the home as dementia friendly as possible.
People were supported to access health professionals and to have their healthcare needs met. A district nurse we spoke with told us the home worked well with them.
Staff were warm, friendly and knew people and their needs well. During the inspection, we saw staff responded to people's distress kindly, using touch to reassure them. People and relatives told us staff were caring and treated people with dignity and respect.
Care records continued to be personal; they included photographs and information about what was important to the person being supported. People’s care records evidenced that the service sought to promote people’s independence, and we observed that people were supported to do as much as they could for themselves.
.
People told us their needs were met by staff at the home. People's needs were assessed and plans of care were devised to meet those needs. Care records were specific and easy to follow. Staff we spoke with talked knowledgably about how they supported people, and these conversations reflected the information we had read in people's care records.
There was a program of activities on offer in the home. People were included in planning events, activities and trips out of the home. People's feedback was sought and acted on. There were regular 'residents meetings', and the results of the annual satisfaction survey had been very positive. One complaint had been made in the year prior to our visit. The provider's complaints policy had been followed, and the complaint had been investigated.
Since our last inspection, there had been changes to the management team. A new registered manager had been employed, and the previous registered manager had taken a newly created position as deputy manager. Staff were positive about the additional management resources and told us the new structure was working well. People and their relatives told us the home was well run.
Feedback from staff and visiting professionals was valued. Staff were asked to share their views on the home during regular staff meetings and through an annual staff survey. Health professionals had been asked to provide feedback on the quality of the service provided. There was evidence that actions had been taken to make improvements where possible.
A range of audits were carried out to assess and monitor the quality of the service. The quality monitoring system included regular checks by both the registered manager and the provider. It was evident that areas for improvement had been highlighted and improvement actions taken.
Haydon View Residential Home is a care home located in Haydon Bridge which can accommodate up to 27 people. At the time of our inspection 12 people received care from the service, some of whom were living with dementia.
This inspection took place on 4 and 10 August 2015. The inspection was unannounced.
The last inspection we carried out at this service was in December 2013 when we found the provider was not meeting three of the regulations we inspected. These breaches related to safety and suitability of premises, assessing and monitoring the quality of service provision and records. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was meeting the legal requirements of these regulations.
A registered manager was in place. 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.
We saw that staff engaged with people positively, using their knowledge of people’s family lives, interests and the local area to encourage to people to take part in activities and interact with other people using the service. People, relatives and health professionals were overwhelmingly positive when talking about the care provided at the home.
Care was centred the individual person. Care plans records included photographs and detailed information about what was important to the person being supported. People gave us examples about how the choices about their care were respected, such as staff supporting them to get up late on a morning.
Staff had received training in end of life care, and those people who wished to, had considered and planned for how they would like to be cared for as they approached the end of their lives. Comments recorded in the compliments file included messages of thanks about how well relatives had been treated as they approached the end of their lives.
People we spoke with told us they felt safe and comfortable living at the home. Staff had been trained in how to respond to any safeguarding concerns. A social worker we spoke with told us staff shared any safeguarding issues with them promptly.
Risks related to care delivery and the environment had been assessed and information was available to staff on how to mitigate these risks. Accidents and incidents were analysed to determine where action should be taken to reduce the likelihood of reoccurrence. Medicines were well managed, and systems were in place to prevent the spread of infection.
The standard of accommodation had been improved since our last inspection, for example, a bathroom had been refurbished the décor within the home had been refreshed. Maintenance staff carried our regular checks to the premises and equipment to ensure these were safe to use and in good working order.
There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. We saw staff were able to complete their tasks in a calm unhurried manner and they had time to sit and talk with people. People, relatives and staff confirmed this. Staff personnel records showed recruitment policies were robust and procedures had been followed to confirm new employee’s identities and previous employment details.
Staff received appropriate training and this training was up to date. They had undertaken a range of care and safety related training, in addition to training based around the specific needs of people they supported. Staff met regularly with their supervisors to discuss their role and personal development.
Staff we spoke with, including the registered manager had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Where decisions had been made in peoples’ ‘best interests’, records were available to show MCA principles had been followed. Where people’s liberty had been restricted in their best interests, and for their own safety, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) had been applied for and approval granted.
People were happy with the food choices available to them. They told us they were given a choice at every meal, and snacks were available throughout the day. Adaptations had been made to the environment to enable people living with dementia to move around the home as independently as possible. People were supported to access health professionals and to have their healthcare needs met. A district nurse and general practitioner (GP) we spoke with told us referrals were made to them at appropriate times.
People told us their needs were met by staff at the home. Assessments of people’s needs were in place and reviewed regularly. Plans of people’s care were easy to follow and detailed. When we spoke with staff they were able to tell us how they supported people, and this information reflected information in their care records.
Activities were planned around people’s interests. An activities coordinator planned and arranged trips, entertainers and formal activities, whilst one to one activities were arranged by people’s key workers.
People were able to share their experiences of the service through regular meetings, and completion of satisfaction surveys. No complaints had been received in the 12 months prior to our visit.
People and relatives spoke highly of the registered manager. They told us she was approachable and that the service was well-led. Staff confirmed this, telling us that the manager’s door was ‘always open’.
Feedback from staff and visiting professionals were valued. Staff were asked to share their views on the home during regular staff meetings. Health professionals had been asked to provide feedback on the quality of the service provided. There was evidence that actions had been taken to make improvements where possible.
A range of audits were carried out to assess and monitor the quality of the service.
Improvements had been made to the standard of record keeping. Records were stored appropriately and on the whole well maintained.
We were unable to speak to all of the people who used the service because of the nature of their condition. We spoke with staff and observed their practices to determine how care and support was delivered.
Relationships between people and staff were clearly good. Relatives told us and we saw in practice staff treated people with respect and helped them to remain as independent as possible.
We found people's needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plans. Relatives we spoke to were positive about the care and support people received.
The home was clean and we saw there were effective systems in place to reduce the spread of infection.
We walked around the premises and found that they were of a suitable design and layout, but not always adequately maintained.
We saw staff recruitment procedures were in place and records showed that these were followed when new staff were appointed. We saw appropriate checks were undertaken before staff began work.
We found that effective systems were not in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service and others.
We found that records held in relation to people's care and treatment were not always accurate and fit for purpose.
We talked to four care staff employed by the service and looked at four staff records. We saw that care staff provided person-centred care and this was reflected in the feedback we read and heard from people during our visit. We found that care staff were trained and supported to meet people's needs safely and effectively.
People said they received enough to eat and drink and they said 'the food is lovely' 'it always smells nice and makes you look forward to eating' 'you can have as much to eat and drink as you like' 'the staff are always coming around with tea and something tasty' 'lovely home cooked meals'.
People confirmed that they could receive medical and specialist attention when they needed it and were helped to fulfil their social needs within the home and community. People we spoke with said 'there is something to do' 'I enjoy my knitting' 'I can join in or relax in my room' 'I like sitting outside the views are superb' 'I like the dominoes'.
People told us that their home was clean, comfortable and warm and they said 'the place is very clean' 'always looks and smells so clean' 'my clothes are well looked after'. They said staff were kind and caring, they said 'these lasses cannot do enough', 'nothing is too much trouble' and 'they are kindness itself'. People confirmed that they were given the opportunity to comment on the service, change routine or raise complaints. They said that their visitors were made to feel welcome and information exchange was good.