We carried out a review of the data available to us about Hernes Nest House 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 Hernes Nest House, you can give feedback on this service.
Hernes Nest House is a care home without nursing which is registered to care for 21 people. Accommodation and personal care are provided to older people requiring support with Dementia, physical disabilities and sensory impairments. At the time of our inspection there were 19 people living at the home.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People at the home told us they felt safe and protected from harm. People were cared for by staff who understood how to protect them from abuse and harm and keep them safe. People had comprehensive assessments, care plans and risk assessments which included information about their care and support needs and preferences. Staff were provided with ongoing training to meet people’s diverse needs and understood people's individual needs. People were supported with their medicines by staff using safe practice. Staff understood and followed infection control and prevention procedures. Incidents and accidents were investigated, and actions were taken to prevent recurrence.
People’s care and support was planned and delivered in line with current best practice guidance and legislation. Care was delivered by staff who were well trained and knowledgeable about people's needs and wishes. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People received personalised care from staff who knew their needs and wishes. People's concerns were listened to and action was taken to improve the service as a result. Where improvements were identified, there were plans in place to ensure these were made . People could remain at Hernes Nest House to receive end of life care, provided by the management team and staff, which was supported by external professionals.
The management team were open, approachable and focussed on providing person centred care. The management team and staff engaged well with other organisations and had developed positive relationships. The registered manager strived to continuously improve their own skills and knowledge. The provider had processes to monitor and improve the quality of the service and there was a culture of openness and of reflection and learning.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 27 April 2017).
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.
The service is a care home without nursing which is registered to care for 21 people.
Accommodation and personal care are provided to older people requiring support with Dementia, physical disabilities and sensory impairments. There were 21 people living at the home when we visited and there was a registered manager in post. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The registered provider of this home was also the registered manager.
People told us they felt safe in the home and that they were comfortable around staff that they knew and felt at ease around. Staff understood how to keep people safe. Staff explained they had received training but also felt able to speak with the registered manager about any concern they had. Staff understood the risks to each person’s health and wellbeing and what steps were needed to keep them healthy. Staff demonstrated how they transferred people from one chair to another safely using specialised equipment. People had access to help and support from staff when they required it and staffing numbers were continually monitored to ensure people had the support they required. Recruitment process included background checks on staff to understand whether the staff were suitable to work at the home. People were supported to take their medicines according to their individual needs.
People felt confident that staff understood how to support them. Staff had access to training and supervision to enable them to support people. The provider acted in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act (2005) (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The provisions of the MCA are used to protect people who might not be able to make informed decisions on their own about the care or treatment they receive. People were able to support people to access further medical advice and support if they required. People were supported to attend amongst others, hospital appointments, dentist and GP appointments. People were encouraged to maintain a healthy diet through the choices they were offered.
People liked the staff supporting them and felt able to engage in friendly chats. Staff understood the people they were supporting and their individual preferences. People were included in choices about their care and how they were supported. People felt cared for in way that promoted their independence and dignity.
People were involved in planning their care so that it best reflected how they wanted to be cared for. People were involved in planning their admission to the home, the activities and interests they wanted to be involved with and deciding how to spend their time within the home. People and their families were involved in regularly reviewing their care so that people were happy with their care and that it met their needs. The registered manager understood people’s needs and had a strong sense of wanting people’s individual personalities reflected in how they were cared for. The registered manager also actively worked to understand people’s expectations of care so that people did not feel the need to complain.
The registered manager had an open and accessible relationship with people and staff. The registered manager understood people’s care and what was needed to ensure their experience of care was positive. Communication with staff was regular and staff were clear in their understanding of the registered manager’s expectations of care. People’s care was regularly reviewed and monitored and systems were embedded that ensured staff understood what action was necessary to meet people’s individual needs.
This inspection took place on 10 December 2014 and was unannounced.
The service is a care home without nursing which is registered to care for 21 people. Accommodation and personal care are provided to older people requiring support with Dementia, physical disabilities and sensory impairments. There were 18 people living at the home when we visited and there was a registered manager in post. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The Provider of this home was also the registered manager.
People were very positive about the care they received and about the staff who looked after them.
People told us that they felt that felt safe. Staff were able to tell us about how they kept people safe. During our inspection we observed that staff were available to meet people’s care and social needs. People received their medicines as prescribed and at the correct time and medications were safely administered and stored.
People and families told us and we saw that privacy and dignity were respected.
The provider acted in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act (2005) (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The provisions of the MCA are used to protect people who might not be able to make informed decisions on their own about the care or treatment they receive.
We found that people’s health care needs were assessed, and care planned and delivered to meet those needs. People had access to other healthcare professionals that provided treatment, advice and guidance to support their health needs and families told us that they felt that further help was sought when needed.
People were supported to eat and drink enough to keep them healthy. People had access to a range of snacks and drinks during the day and had choices at mealtimes. Where people had special dietary requirements we saw that these were provided for.
Staff were provided with in-depth training that was continually updated. The registered manager told us that all staff received training and regular checks were made to ensure that everyone received the right training.
People and staff told us that they would raise concerns with senior staff, deputy manager or the registered manager and were confident that any concerns would be dealt with. The registered manager made regular checks to monitor the quality of the care that people received and continually reviewed care to ensure improvements were made where they were required.
The people we spoke with were complimentary about the home and the care they received. One person told us: 'It's lovely. The carers are nice.' Another person said: 'I like it here. They make sure I'm always neat.'
We watched staff as they cared for people. They provided care and support that met people's needs.
We found that staff knew about the needs of the people they were caring for. We looked at care records for three people and found that these contained guidance for staff on how to meet those needs. The provider was revising the format of people's records. Some of the records we looked at contained gaps where this work was not yet completed.
We found that people were able to have a choice of suitable and nutritious food and drink in sufficient quantities to meet their needs.
We found that the equipment that was used in the home was maintained appropriately and that staff had been trained in its use.
There was a system in place for people to complain if they were not happy with any aspect of the service.
We found that staff kept accurate records of the care that people had received and that these records were stored appropriately.
People that we spoke with told us that they were happy with the home and the staff. One person told us, 'I have my ups and downs but I'm happy here.' A visitor that we spoke with told us, 'The general ambience is done well. It gives you peace of mind. I'm reassured that X is being looked after.'
Staff knew about the needs of the people they were caring for. We looked at care plans for three people and found that these contained varying levels of guidance for staff on how to meet their needs. We saw that people's needs were reviewed regularly.
People told us that they felt safe living at the home and knew who to speak to if they had any concerns. Staff had received training on how to recognise signs of abuse and knew how to report concerns.
We saw that staff were supported to be trained to an appropriate standard although some parts of their training had not been refreshed recently.
We looked at records which showed that the provider was regularly monitoring the quality of its service.