You are here

Archived: Haddon Court Nursing Home Requires improvement

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 30 March 2017

We carried out this inspection on 22 September 2016. The inspection was unannounced. This meant no-one at the service knew that we were planning to visit.

Haddon Court was last inspected by CQC on 15 September 2014 and was compliant with the regulations in force at that time.

Haddon Court is a nursing home registered for up to 80 people situated within Beighton Village, approximately five miles from the city centre of Sheffield. The home is within easy access of the local community, which has a selection of shops and churches. Haddon Court is a large purpose built three-storey care home. It provides nursing and personal care for older people who have a physical disability, nursing needs or are living with dementia. The provider has temporarily closed the top floor of this service to focus on supporting people living with dementia. There were 53 people living at Haddon Court at the time of our inspection.

There was a manager at the service who was registered with CQC. 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 told us they liked living at Haddon Court and they felt safe there. Relatives said they felt their family member was safe at Haddon Court.

All staff understood what it meant to protect people from abuse. They told us they were confident any concerns they raised would be taken seriously by management.

Not all medicines were stored safely. We found gaps in medication administration records which meant people may not have always have been given their medicines at the right time. Medication administration records were not regularly audited to check that medicines were given to people as prescribed.

People’s care records included risk assessments; however some contained gaps in recording information, and others were incorrectly completed. This meant staff didn’t always have all the necessary information required to meet people’s needs as safely as possible.

Care staff we spoke with had received training on understanding the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and were able to give examples of what this meant in practice.

Care records did not reflect whether a person had capacity to make decisions about their care and treatment. The registered manager had referred everyone living at Haddon Court for a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisation. This blanket approach was not necessary and meant they may not have fully understood their responsibilities with regard to the MCA.

Staff were provided with appropriate training, regular supervisions and an annual appraisal to ensure they were suitable for their job and supported in their role.

We saw people had access to external health professionals and this was evidenced in people’s care records.

People living at Haddon Court and their relatives told us staff were caring and supportive. We saw and heard positive interactions between people and staff.

People told us they enjoyed the variety of food and drinks available to them. We saw there were different options available at mealtimes, and drinks and snacks were made available throughout the day.

People living at Haddon Court and staff working there, told us the registered manager was approachable and responsive to any concerns they had.

The service had up to date policies and procedures which reflected current legislation and good practice guidance.

There were no records of any meetings with people, their relatives or staff. This meant that although people and staff may have been asked for their views, their responses were not recorded and therefore not necessarily acted on. There was evidence of regular quality audits being undertaken. However, there was no record of any actions to be taken as a result. In addition in

Inspection areas

Safe

Inadequate

Updated 30 March 2017

The service was not always safe.

Medicines were not always stored safely or administered when they should be.

Safe recruitment procedures were not always followed.

People’s care records contained risk assessments; however some contained gaps in recording information, and others were incorrectly completed.

Staffing levels were appropriate to meet the needs of people who lived at Haddon Court.

People living at Haddon Court and their relatives told us they felt the service was safe.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 30 March 2017

The service was not always effective.

Care records did not reflect whether a person had capacity to make decisions about their care and treatment. The registered manager had unnecessarily referred everyone living at Haddon Court for a DoLS authorisation.

Staff received regular supervisions, annual appraisals and appropriate training to support them to carry out their jobs effectively.

People were offered a variety of options to meet their nutritional and hydration needs. People living at Haddon Court told us they enjoyed the food and drinks on offer.

Caring

Good

Updated 30 March 2017

The service was caring.

People living at Haddon Court and their relatives told us the staff were caring.

Staff knew what it meant to treat people with dignity and respect.

Staff spoke with affection and a good knowledge about the people they supported. They knew people’s preferences and social histories.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 30 March 2017

The service was not always responsive.

Care records had gaps in recording information and where information was recorded it did not always accurately reflect the person’s current level of need.

There were organised activities available to people living at Haddon Court on weekdays. Some people and their relatives told us they would like more activities.

There was an up to date complaints policy and procedure in place, but no overall record kept to identify any trends.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 30 March 2017

The service was not always well-led.

The views of people living at Haddon Court and staff working there were not regularly obtained and were not recorded.

There was evidence of regular quality audits being undertaken. However, there was no record of any actions to be taken as a result.

The service held up to date policies and procedures which reflected current legislation and good practice guidance.

People living at Haddon Court and staff working there told us the registered manager and the management team were approachable and supportive.