You are here

Archived: Hampden Hall Care Centre Requires improvement

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 7 August 2019

Hampden Hall Care Centre is a nursing home providing personal and nursing care to 109 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 120 people in one adapted building.

Accommodation is provided on three floors. People living with dementia reside on the ground floor. Nursing care is provided on the first floor with both nursing and residential care on the second floor.

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

Some people told us they felt safe living in the service, whilst others did not. We found the service was in breach of regulation 12 (Safe care and treatment) of The Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. This was due to poor medicine management and a lack of accurate up to date recordings in relation to health needs and risk assessments.

People and their relatives told us “One of the problems is there's not enough staff.” They were concerned about the welfare of the staff and that people may not receive care in a timely way. The provider was aware and was attempting to address this issue by offering financial incentives to staff. Staff were knowledgeable about infection control and safeguarding people from abuse.

Records related to the risk of people suffering from malnutrition and/or developing pressure ulceration were not accurately completed. There were concerns about the competence of staff to provide catheter care, and to accurately record or set air mattresses correctly. Nursing staff were not able to demonstrate correct knowledge and expertise in dealing with diabetic hypoglycaemia (low blood sugar levels). People had access to a GP and other health professionals when necessary.

The ground floor environment was not conducive to caring for people with dementia because the environment was noisy and lots of people were gathered in the same area. 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.

There was a mixed response from people with regards to how they were treated by staff. Some people told us they weren’t always treated in a respectful way by staff. Others praised the staff for their kindness and support. People told us how their dignity was protected, others felt the attitude of some staff was “off.” Communication between staff and people was not always positive or skilled. We have made a recommendation about how to improve the care for people living with dementia.

There was a mixed response from people regarding the activities in the service. The activities were not always person centred or meaningful to people. We observed people being left for long periods without any stimulation and conversely enjoying a glitz and glamour day with staff and visitors.

The provider had tools in place to meet people’s communication needs. Complaints were dealt with in a timely way. We received positive feedback from the relatives of people who had died. People and staff were treated equally, and people’s cultural needs were catered for.

The service was going through a period of change and it was clear from our findings there had been a lack of oversight of records, and the support offered to people daily. Quality assurance audits had not identified the areas of concern we found. The provider was open and honest with us about the challenges the staff and people faced to improve the service. Plans were in place to improve the service to people. The provider had been proactive throughout the inspection to rectify what areas they could.

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 13 October 2017).

Why we inspected

The inspection was prompted in part due to the number of safeguarding notifications we had received. A de

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 7 August 2019

The service was not always safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 7 August 2019

The service was not always effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Requires improvement

Updated 7 August 2019

The service was not always caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 7 August 2019

The service was not always responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 7 August 2019

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-Led findings below.