Hampstead Court 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.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

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

We saw evidence of people’s needs being assessed prior to them moving in and regularly thereafter. Care plans were detailed and individualised. People’s communication care needs were highlighted and the preferred way to manage this were recorded.

Some people had communication needs that had changed over time and we saw evidence that this was discussed and approaches altered where necessary.

Care plans were reviewed regularly. They included information about well-being and people’s preferences.

People were involved in updates to their care plans and aware of any changes made.

The provider 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 and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

We saw comprehensive risk assessments and care plans relevant to people’s needs in relation to specific conditions, such as diabetes, dementia and pressure ulcers. Staff we spoke to demonstrated a good understanding of people's clinical needs and the support they needed to manage these.

People and their relatives told us they were involved with care planning and this was apparent in care plans we reviewed. People’s preferences and individual requirements were at the forefront of these plans. One person told us, “When they help me, they do things appropriately, showing they know me well.”

Relevant professionals were also involved and those we spoke to told us that the service was responsive to their instructions and keeping them updated as well as raising new concerns promptly and appropriately.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

The service had good working relationships with other professionals. They worked very closely with the GP who visited weekly and others including rapid response teams and community nurse teams.

One professional we spoke to told us they enjoyed visiting Hampstead Court Care Home and felt the staff team worked well with them. Staff made timely referrals when people needed additional support. They shared appropriate information with external professionals.

Regular multidisciplinary team meetings took place to ensure staff from each department understood people’s needs.

Staff told us, “We have enough staff and work well together”. We observed this throughout our assessment.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to 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 and encouraged to be physically active with consideration for their specific needs. For example, regular arm chair exercise sessions took place. There was also a well-attended walking group supported by care staff for those who needed support in the community. Those who required support were also assisted to visit local shops and parks.

People who required physiotherapy were supported by staff to undertake exercises and progress was shared with relevant professionals.

The meals provided was freshly cooked by kitchen staff and provided a balance of nutrients. Individual dietary requirements and preferences were catered for. Staff recorded changes in people’s appetite and weight and amending meals where needed to support people.

People’s cultural needs were also met by providing appropriate meals and addressing choices.

There was a selection of snacks available including fruit. Water and fruit juices were also available for people in each lounge. Where required staff monitored the amount of fluid people drank to ensure they had enough to drink.

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

Staff at the home closely monitored clinical outcomes.

This involved people, their relatives where appropriate and professionals involved in their care. Changes in care needs were raised with relevant healthcare professionals, with outcomes monitored and followed up. Staff were clear regarding expected progress of treatments and escalated appropriately when treatment was not showing results. Changes and progress were monitored and shared at regular multidisciplinary healthcare meetings and reviewed by visiting GP.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

People were asked to consent to care plans when they were produced and at each review. Staff always sought consent before provide care. This was confirmed by people we spoke to. One person said, “They always ask permission before undertaking any tasks”.

Where people did not have the mental capacity to provide consent, decision specific mental capacity assessments were undertaken and recorded. Consent was then sought from the relevant person who had the legal authority to make decisions on a person’s behalf or if consent could not be obtained then decisions were made in the person’s best interests.