Archived: Hart House

Updated 31 May 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on the 8 May 2017 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of one inspector.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We reviewed previous reports and notifications that are held on the CQC database. Notifications are important events that the service has to let the CQC know about by law. We also reviewed safeguarding alerts and information received from a local authority.

During our inspection we spoke with five people, the registered manager, deputy manager and senior care worker. We reviewed three care files, two staff recruitment files and their support records, audits and policies held at the service.

Updated 31 May 2017

We inspected Hart House on the 8 May 2017.

The service provides accommodation and support for up to ten people with mental health issues. There were nine people living at the service at the time of our inspection.

At our last inspection the service was rated as Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

The service was safe. Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. People were cared for safely by staff who had been recruited and employed after appropriate checks had been completed. People’s needs were met by sufficient numbers of staff. Medication was dispensed by staff who had received training to do so.

The service was effective. People were cared for and supported by staff who had received training to support people to meet their needs. The registered manager had a good understanding of their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff always worked hard to promote people’s independence through encouraging and supporting people to make informed choices. People were supported with their nutritional needs and had access to healthcare when required.

The service was caring. Staff cared for people in an empathetic and kind manner. Staff had a good understanding of people’s preferences of care. People’s care was individually planned for their needs.

The service was responsive. People and their relatives were involved in the planning and review of their care. Care plans were reviewed on a regular basis and also when there was a change in care needs. People were supported to follow their interests and participate in social activities. The registered manager responded to complaints received in a timely manner.

The service was well-led. The service had systems in place to monitor and provide good care and these were reviewed on a regular basis.