Hampstead Court Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

This is the first assessment for thisservice. This key question has been ratedgood.

This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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 were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care plans were person centred and included input from people and/or their representatives. Care plans were reviewed and updated regularly. They reflected changes in both care needs and personal preferences.

A relative we spoke to told us, “The carers all know [them] and how best to support [them]. I genuinely feel carers are focused on the residents as individual people”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The service had strong working relationships with healthcare teams. Multidisciplinary meetings were held regularly. A cohesive approach from all involved ensured health issues were discussed promptly and follow up actions were reviewed with relevant professionals visiting the home when required. This ensured that all involved in a person’s care were aware of the input of other professionals and could work together for best outcomes.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

People told us they received a daily newsletter. One person commented, “We get the ‘Avery Daily’ with quizzes, events and other things on it - it’s informative.”

Activity timetables were displayed in communal areas as well as being provided to individuals. These included a colour code to highlight the type of activity, for example ‘physical’ or ‘wellbeing’

People also took part in regular meetings where information was shared verbally and people were able to ask questions.

The provider supported people and their relatives to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

Two people were ambassadors who supported other people to share feedback, ideas and experiences. Ambassadors raised concerns people had and help support other people in the care home resolve any issues.

Feedback was sought and taken into account by the service and changes were made where improvements were identified, such as changes to the menu and activities. A person said, “In fact I have an idea for a meal and I’m going to cook it alongside the chef.” However, 6 of the 9 people we spoke to could not recall being asked for their views about the care they received. We fed this back to the manager, so they could consider additional ways or changes to frequency of seeking feedback from people.

The provider had a clear complaints procedure and system which tracked complaints from receipt to resolution with actions and learning recorded.

People told us they were involved in decisions about their care and understood any changes made. Care plans we reviewed reflected this.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Staff supported people to access external services. These included healthcare services such as visiting podiatrists and community nursing/GP as well hairdressers. Efforts had been made to find a barber for men to use as this was the preference of some people.

Family and people’s representatives were involved to support them if requested and advocacy referrals made where this was not available.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

Staff undertook equality and diversity training and there was a policy in place to support this.

People with dementia were involved to be part of the wider home community, with visits from 6th form school pupils for conversation and visits in the local area. To ensure equity in assess to activities the provider conducted risk assessments and made changes to ensure those who needed extra support could be included. For example, deploying addition staff to support those with reduced mobility.

All people had access to healthcare services and arrangements were made for those who required the support of an advocate to ensure their voices were heard and needs considered objectively.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

Future planning formed part of everyone’s care plan. Needs and preferences were recorded and regularly reviewed for changes in decisions.

People’s preferences for end-of-life care was recorded in care plans. People's wishes regarding ‘do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation’(DNACPR) were recorded and clear in their care plans. This planning was person centred to reflect individual wishes and reviewed regularly. Palliative care teams formed part of multidisciplinary meetings at appropriate times.