Hampton Court Care Home

Updated 16 December 2023

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of this inspection we looked at the infection control and prevention measures in place. This was conducted so we can understand the preparedness of the service in preventing or managing an infection outbreak, and to identify good practice we can share with other services.

Inspection team

The inspection was conducted by 2 inspectors, a specialist nurse advisor and an Expert by Experience. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type

Hampton Court is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing and/or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement dependent on their registration with us. Hampton Court is a care home with nursing care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Registered Manager

This provider is required to have a registered manager to oversee the delivery of regulated activities at this location. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Registered managers and providers are legally responsible for how the service is run, for the quality and safety of the care provided and compliance with regulations.

At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager in post.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with 9 people who used the service and 5 relatives about their experience of the care provided. 1 visiting professional also shared their feedback with us. We also spoke with 6 staff members, the registered manager and the nominated individual. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider.

We reviewed a range of records, these included 7 people’s care records, medicines administration records and governance and quality assurance records. We also looked at 3 staff recruitment files. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Updated 16 December 2023

About the service

Hampton Court is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to up to 80 people. The service provides support to older people, some of whom are living with dementia, or have mental health needs. At the time of our inspection there were 51 people using the service.

Hampton Court accommodates people across 2 separate units, each of which has separate adapted facilities. The smaller unit, known as The Lodge, specialises in providing care to people living with advanced dementia.

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

Systems used to review and monitor the quality of care provided were not always effective at identifying concerns.

People told us they felt safe. Staff knew how to identify possible signs of abuse and how to escalate concerns for people’s safety. People received their medicines as prescribed and there were enough staff to support people safely and respond to their needs. Staff had been safely recruited and there were systems in place to monitor the risk of infection. Where things went wrong action was taken to reduce the risk of reoccurrence and learn for the future.

People’s needs had been assessed and care plans contained details of their wishes and preferences. Staff knew people well and understood their likes and dislikes. Staff had received training in the roles and felt supported by the wider staff team and the management team. People received enough to eat and drink, and any dietary needs were known by staff so people could receive appropriate support. People’s health needs were managed with the support of external agencies. Improvements had been made to the home environment and were suitable for the needs of people living with dementia.

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 told us staff were kind and caring. There was a friendly, relaxed atmosphere within the home and people were comfortable to approach staff for care and support. People were involved in decisions about their care. Support was dignified and people’s independence was promoted where possible.

People’s care was planned with their involvement where possible. Staff understood people’s individual preferences and provided care tailored to each person. People’s communication needs had been considered to give people the best opportunity to understand information presented to them. People were encouraged to take part in activities which interested them. There was a system in place for the management of complaints. People’s end of life wishes were considered and staff worked alongside external agencies to ensure people received dignified care.

People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the management of the home. Feedback reflected there had been numerous positive comments and compliments made about staff and the care people received. There were established governance systems in place used to monitor the quality of care people received. There was a positive approach to learning at the home and any learning identified was shared with staff to raise the standard of care provided. Staff worked in partnership with other agencies to meet people’s needs. People, relatives and staff had been asked for their feedback about the home and responses were reviewed to ensure action could be taken to drive improvements in people’s care.

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 the service under the previous provider was requires improvement, published on 5 December 2019.

Why we inspected

The inspection was prompted in part due to concerns received about safety. A decision was made for us to inspect and examine those risks. We found no evidence during this inspection that people were at risk of harm from this concern. Please see the safe section of this full report.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.