Hall Park Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has improved to outstanding.

This meant people’s outcomes were consistently better than expected compared to similar services. People’s feedback described it as personalised and distinctive.

This service scored 100 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The management team always made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by thoroughly assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

The management team ensured people, and their relatives were fully involved in their own assessments and reviews of their care. People felt confident their views and opinions were fully respected, listened to and implemented as part of their day-to-day support.

People’s life stories and clinical history were exceptionally detailed and considered as the baseline for all of their care planning. Care plans we reviewed showed a clear understanding of people and their identified needs. Where support from external health and social care teams was identified, these referrals had been promptly made. People could be confident in being at the centre of fully wrap around care provision.

The service always planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation. They worked to develop evidence-based good practice and standards.

The management team ensured people were fully involved in understanding their needs, and those of their peers. People had been given the choice to participate in dementia awareness training, to help them understand their own diagnosis, or that of their peers. One person explained how it had helped them to better understand one of their close friends living at the service, and how they could support them.

Where people lived with diet and medication managed diabetes, their care plans and risk assessments were clear and robust. Information for staff on supporting a effective low sugar diet, daily checks needed, and what to do if a person became unwell were all clear. Staff we spoke with showed a clear understanding of ensuring people were supported to maintain a healthy diet and fluid intake. The kitchen team showed an exceptional knowledge of people who required support with specific diets. The daily menus were planned accordingly, along with drinks and snacks.

Where a person was living far away from family or the area they grew up in, the staff team ensured people received visits or were able to keep in regular contact, to support important relationships.

The service always worked well across teams and services to support people. They shared thorough assessments of people’s needs when they moved between different services, so people only needed to tell their story once.

When people had moved into the service, we saw a comprehensive pre-admission assessment had been completed. These were incorporated into exceptionally detailed care plans. The plans fully considered people’s dreams and aspirations. These were clearly communicated in their care plans, ensuring a consistent approach was maintained between services.

A visiting health professional explained how the service also supported them during their working day. The service welcomed them spending time in a quiet lounge area to complete their visit notes prior to attending their next visit. This professional told us how beneficial this was for them, and they felt Hall Park offered a pleasant, well-maintained environment, with a responsive staff team.

The service always supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to fully maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

People were supported to maintain a healthy dietary and fluid intake by the staff team. The cook and kitchen team showed an exceptional knowledge of ensuring high quality nutrition and choices for people. Directions from external teams, for people requiring modified or specific diets were clearly recorded and regularly reviewed. One relative told us, “My family member is supported by staff and is on a soft food diet. I have witnessed this support and was very happy with the staff interaction with them.” Another relative told us, “My family member is thriving, putting on weight, and is interested in life.”

We spoke with a member of the domestic team, who told us, “I always make sure the dining experience is as positive as it can be for people. I lay the tables and set them out in a restaurant style. I love doing this, it makes people feel special.” The dining times were flexible, so people could choose when they wanted to join for meals, suiting people who may find larger groups overwhelming. We saw the service had pictorial guides for the plating of the available meals, to support people who may struggle with understanding written menus. The lunchtime service we observed was a calm, sociable, pleasant experience for people. People were discreetly supported by staff if required, and conversations flowed naturally.

The management team monitored all people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they fully met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

People’s skills, life experience and strengths were discussed with them and those involved in their care, to understand how their ambitions and outcomes could be planned and achieved. People were fully supported to maintain physical and mental wellbeing. Care plans were strength based, focussed on what people could do to support themselves, rather than any limitations they may face.

The management team had recently undertaken oral health accreditation, to ensure people were supported to maintain good dental health. The management team were currently seeking a designated dentist, to ensure this was fully maintained.

The management team always carefully explained to people what their rights around consent were, made sure they fully understood them and always fully respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

The service championed informed consent. People told us that staff asked for consent before carrying out any personal care. Staff understood how to effectively communicate with people about their choices when they did not use verbal communication. Objects of reference and visual aids were used to support this. Personalised care records included how either through verbal or non-verbal means people were able to refuse or give consent for specific decisions. We observed people were always asked for consent by staff prior to entering their bedrooms or before providing personal care.

The management team had ensured they were working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). The MCA provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The MCA requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to make particular decisions, any that are made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the MCA.

We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA, whether appropriate legal authorisations were in place when needed to deprive a person of their liberty, and whether any conditions relating to those authorisations were being met. We found the service was working within the principles of the MCA and if needed, appropriate legal authorisations were in place to deprive a person of their liberty.

Where people lacked capacity for consent, the management team had identified this as a support need and escalated it to the relevant agencies.