We carried out a review of the data available to us about Little Haven 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 Little Haven, you can give feedback on this service.
Little Haven is a residential home providing personal and nursing care to 40 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 43 people. The home has three floors and communal areas on the ground floor.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Staff understood how to keep people safe from harm, poor care practices and abuse and the action they should take to ensure they were protected. People’s risks associated with their care and health were identified, assessed and managed to reduce their risks.
There were a sufficient number of staff to meet people’s needs in a timely manner. There were processes in place to recruit staff who were suitable to work in a caring environment.
Medicines were managed to ensure people received the medicines prescribed for them safely.Staff protected people from the risk of infection by using the personal protective equipment freely available to them in the home.
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 were provided with a choice of food and drinks were offered regularly. People's wellbeing was supported by healthcare professionals whenever addition guidance was required. Staff were supported to gain the skills and experience they needed to fulfil their role effectively.
People enjoyed the company of staff who respected their privacy and promoted their dignity. People were able to maintain their important relationships, as relatives and friends could visit at any time.
People received the care they preferred because staff asked them and their relatives about their likes and dislikes. Care was reviewed regularly to ensure it was still relevant for people. People enjoyed a varied programme of entertainment and support with activities to prevent them from becoming socially isolated. People told us they were happy with their care and would speak with the registered manager or staff if they wanted to discuss a concern or complaint.
People, relatives and staff had confidence in the managerial arrangements in the home. There were regular checks on the quality of care provided. People and staff were given the opportunity to voice their opinions through meetings and satisfaction surveys. Links had been made with community groups who visited people in the home.
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 (6 July 2017)
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
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.
This inspection took place on 6 July 2017 and was unannounced.
At the last inspection on 3 and 4 February 2016 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
This inspection was brought forward from the planned date due to concerns about how the registered provider was monitoring the safe management of medicines.
There were systems and processes in place to protect people from harm. Staff were trained in how to recognise and respond to abuse and understood their responsibility to report any concerns to the management team.
Safe recruitment practices were followed and appropriate checks had been undertaken, which made sure only suitable staff were employed to care for people in the home. There were sufficient numbers of experienced staff to meet people’s needs.
Following concerns we had received since the last inspection, the medicines management procedures had recently been improved through increased monitoring and staff vigilance.
People were supported by staff who had received an induction into the home and appropriate training, professional development and supervision to enable them to meet people’s individual needs.
Staff followed legislation designed to protect people’s rights and ensure decisions were the least restrictive and made in their best interests.
People were supported to have enough to eat and drink. Mealtimes were a social event and staff supported people in a patient and friendly manner.
Staff developed caring and positive relationships with people, were sensitive to their individual choices and treated them with dignity and respect. People and their families were supported to express their views and be involved in making decisions about their care and support.
The service was responsive to people’s needs and staff listened to what they said. Staff were prompt to raise issues about people’s health and people were referred to health professionals when needed. People were confident that any concerns or complaints they raised would be dealt with.
People living in the home and staff spoke positively about how the service was managed. There was an open and inclusive culture within the service. There were a range of systems in place to assess and monitor the quality and safety of the service and to ensure people were receiving appropriate care and support.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
This inspection took place on 3 and 4 February 2016 and was unannounced.
At the last inspection on 2 May 2013 we found the service complied with all of the regulations we inspected.
Little Haven provides accommodation, personal care and nursing treatment for up to 43 older people. There were 37 people using the service at the time of this inspection.
The service did not have a registered manager. 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. The registered manager had resigned a short time before this inspection and an interim manager was overseeing the day to day management of the service.
The provider had made significant improvements to the governance arrangements in place. A range of audits were undertaken to assess and monitor the quality and safety of the service. These needed to be embedded and sustained to ensure that they continued to drive improvements.
There were systems and processes in place to protect people from harm. Staff were trained in how to recognise and respond to abuse and understood their responsibility to report any concerns.
Medicines were managed safely as the staff responsible for administering people’s medicines were suitably trained and competent.
There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs. Safe recruitment practices were followed and appropriate checks had been undertaken, which made sure only suitable staff were employed to care for people in the home.
Staff were supported to carry out their roles and received an induction and ongoing training and supervision. Staff were kind and caring and worked in a manner that respected people’s privacy and protected their dignity.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which apply to care homes. Where people’s liberty or freedoms were at risk of being restricted, the proper authorisations were in place or had been applied for.
People received on-going health checks and support to access healthcare services. They were supported to eat and drink enough to meet their needs.
People were confident they could raise concerns or complaints and that these would be dealt with.
There was a positive and open culture within the service, which encouraged people’s involvement and their feedback was used to drive improvements.
Records were securely stored and were up to date and accurately maintained in relation to the care and treatment provided.
There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified, skilled and experienced persons employed.
Most people we spoke with said they thought there were sufficient numbers of staff available when they needed them. People gave examples of staff usually responding promptly when they used their call bell. People told us that members of staff would explain if they were busy and they would return to help later. Comments from staff however, indicated that staffing levels sometimes meant they could not always spend the time needed to talk with people.