You are here

Hawthorns Residential Home Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

Hawthorn Residential Home is a residential care home for 13 older people some of whom may be living with dementia. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. At the time of this inspection 11 people were living at the service.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

People were protected from abuse by staff who were trained and knowledgeable about safeguarding adults and understood their responsibilities. The provider had suitable policies and procedures in place for staff to follow to keep people safe.

Where people had been assessed for a risk of harm we found that there were risk assessments in place for staff to follow to minimise that risk for the person.

People lived in premises which the provider maintained safely. The provider carried out a range of health and safety checks including fire safety, water temperatures and hygiene, window restrictors, electrical and gas safety, equipment maintenance and servicing.

Medicines were being administered and managed safely by trained and competent staff. The provider checked that people received their medicines as prescribed.

There was enough staff employed at the service to provide people with safe care. We saw that the provider regularly reviewed the staffing levels to ensure that people had the maximum amount of time with staff.

The provider had recruitment systems in place to ensure that the people they employed were suitable to work with vulnerable people.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Staff understood their responsibilities in relation to respecting people’s privacy and dignity.

People enjoyed the food they received and had choice over meals in line with their preferences and cultural needs. People were supported to maintain their health and had regular contract with health professionals.

People received care in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The provider appropriately applied for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisation where it was necessary to deprive a person of their liberty as part of keeping them safe.

People's care needs were assessed and detailed plans were in place to meet their individual needs. People told us that they were cared for by staff who knew them very well, promoted their independence and understood how to support them.

A training programme was in place that enabled staff to provide good standards of person-centred care. New staff also received a suitable induction.

Staff received regular supervision and an annual appraisal which allowed the registered manager to plan further training to support staff development.

Staff had an understanding of the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and had received training.

The service had an effective complaints process in place and people were aware of it and understood how to make a complaint should they need to. The service actively encouraged feedback from people and staff.

Leadership was visible and competent with an experienced registered manager in post. The provider was accessible to people and staff. One person told us "I would give the home 10 out of 10, I don't think there's any improvements that could be made." The management team carried out audits of the service to check the quality of care.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

The service remains Good

Effective

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

The service remains Good

Caring

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

The service remains Good.

Responsive

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

The service remains Good.

Well-led

Good

Updated 22 November 2018

The service remains Good.