Newland Hurst

Newland Hurst ensured current government guidelines in relation to COVID-19 were being followed by staff and visitors to reduce the risk of infection to people living at the home. This included comprehensive checks for visitors on arrival.

Newland Hurst had spacious communal areas both indoors and outdoors which helped facilitate social distancing. There was designated areas for residents to meet with their visitors.

Newland Hurst engaged with their residents to help them comply with measures to minimise the risk of infection to themselves and others. This included regular testing, the use of personal protective equipment and vaccination.

Effective use of the premises was made to ensure residents did not miss out on activities when they were unable to attend their usual events outside the home due to lockdown restrictions and isolation.

We signposted the provider to information relating to putting on and taking off personal protective equipment.

Newland Hurst is a residential care home providing personal care for up to 16 people with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. People’s care and accommodation is provided within a Victorian house, situated in extensive grounds, which has been extended to include modern facilities. At the time of our inspection, there were 15 people living at the home.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties. It was registered for the support of up to 16 people. 15 people were using the service. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However. the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by, amongst other things, the building layout and design, and the dress code of staff which did not identify them as care staff.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Staff understood how to identify and report potential abuse involving the people who lived at the home. The risks to people had been assessed and plans developed to manage these. The provider monitored and adjusted staffing levels at the service, to ensure people’s needs could be safely met. People had the support needed to take their medicines safely and as prescribed. Staff were supplied with, and made use of, personal protective equipment to reduce the risk of cross-infection. Accidents and incidents involving people were reported by staff and monitored by management to ensure learning from these.

People’s individual care needs were assessed before they moved into the home and reviewed with them on an annual basis. Staff received ongoing training to ensure they had the knowledge and skills needed to work effectively. Staff and management helped people to attend routine health appointments and check-ups and to seek professional medical advice if they were unwell. People had the support they needed from staff to maintain a balanced diet. Staff understood and promoted people’s right to make day-to-day decisions.

People were supported by staff who knew them well and were kind and compassionate. People had support to express their views about the care provided. Staff treated people with dignity and respect at all times and actively promoted their independence.

People’s care plans were individual to them and included information about what was most important to them. People had support to participate in a range of social and recreational activities, both in-house and within their local community. People and their relatives knew how to raise any concerns or complaints with the provider, and felt comfortable doing so. Steps were taken to identify people’s wishes regarding their end-of-life care in order that these could be addressed at the appropriate point.

The management team promoted a positive, inclusive and person-centred culture within the service, based upon open communication with people and their relatives. Most staff felt well-supported and valued by the registered manager. People’s communication needs were assessed in order to promote effective communication with each individual. The provider carried out quality assurance activities designed to enable them to monitor and improve the quality of people’s care. The registered manager had identified that two people's care plans were not up to date and was reviewing and updating these. The registered manager took steps to keep themselves up to date with current legislation and best practice guidelines. Links between the service and the local community were maintained and developed to benefit the people living at the home.

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (report published 11 May 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

People continued to receive safe care and there were enough staff to provide support to people to meet their needs. People were protected from the risk of harm and received their prescribed medicines safely.

The care that people received continued to be effective. People made decisions about their care and staff sought people’s consent. Systems were in place to support people if they needed help making key decisions about their life. Staff received training to meet the specific needs of people who lived at the home. People were supported to stay well and had access to health care services and enjoyed their mealtime experiences.

People had built caring relationships with the staff who supported them and were encouraged to make their own choices and decisions. People were treated with dignity and staff were caring.

People and their relatives were involved in the planning and review of their care and support. Where people and their relatives had any concerns they were able to make a complaint and this was responded to.

People and staff were encouraged to make any suggestions to improve the care they received and how the home could be improved. The registered manager worked with people, their relatives and other organisations in an open way. Systems were in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service.

People's needs had been assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. Staff told us they were aware of each person's needs and how to give care and support to meet those needs. When asked people told us: 'Yes' they liked living there and 'I like it here'.

We saw that people looked comfortable in their home and with the staff that supported them. We saw that staff were kind and caring in their approach to people who lived in the home.

The provider and registered manager of the home had taken steps to monitor and assess the quality of care and support provided to people who lived at the home.

The premises offer a generous range of communal rooms for people to choose from. There were three lounges, a large kitchen leading to an open dining room and a number of craft rooms that people were able to use when they wished to. Some bedrooms had en-suite facilities and most of the others had dedicated bathrooms. We asked a person what it was like to live at the home, they said, "I just like it."

People who lived at the home felt safe. Staff had received training in safeguarding and knew how to respond to concerns. From our observations and discussions with staff we found that there were enough staff to meet peoples personal and health care needs as well as supporting to lead a varied lifestyle to suit their individual preferences.

The person we spoke with told us they knew how to make a complaint. Staff told us they assisted people who had communication difficulties in making a complaint.