• Services in your home
  • Homecare service

Hurst Place

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

1 Kleinwort Close, Haywards Heath, RH16 4XH 0808 102 4070

Provided and run by:
Anchor Hanover Group

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Our current view of the service

Good

Updated 7 July 2026

About the service

Hurst Place is a purpose built complex for people who wish to live independently but have access to personal care should they require it. Hurst Place provides personal care and support to people in specialist 'extra care' housing. Extra care housing is purpose-built or adapted single household accommodation in a shared site or building. The accommodation is bought and is the occupant's own home. People's care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care; this is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. This inspection looked at people's personal care and support. At the time of the inspection 3 people were using the service.

Who the service is for

This service supports older people and younger adults, with a range of needs including frailty, physical health conditions, and dementia, who were living in their own homes.

We carried out this assessment on 16 July 2026. This service was previously rated as good. We carried out this assessment to confirm whether the rating of good remains accurate. This report does not provide detailed information on areas where we found practice continues to meet a good standard. Instead, our findings focus on any areas where the service needs to improve or where we found exceptional practice.


People received safe, person-centred care from staff who knew them well and understood their individual needs, preferences, and routines. Risks to people's health, safety and wellbeing were assessed, monitored, and reviewed through a range of assessments, including falls, mobility, environmental and skin integrity assessments. Where incidents occurred, these were recorded, investigated, and reviewed appropriately, with learning identified and actions taken to reduce the likelihood of recurrence. Systems were in place to identify patterns and trends and leaders demonstrated a clear understanding of their responsibilities for safeguarding and statutory notifications. Medicines support was provided safely and in line with people's assessed needs, with regular auditing and oversight arrangements in place.
People's needs were assessed before care commenced and care plans reflected their individual circumstances, strengths, and risks. Assessments considered physical health, mobility, capacity, and support requirements, and were used to develop person-centred care plans. Staff worked closely with people, families, and partners to ensure care remained responsive to changing needs. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and how they managed this within the service. We found that staff and management worked within the MCA. People were not subject to unlawful or excessive restrictions they had choice, control, and freedom over their lives.


There were effective arrangements in place to recruit, support and develop staff. Recruitment processes included the checks required to ensure staff were suitable to work in care services. Staff completed induction, mandatory training and competency assessments relevant to their roles, and received regular supervision and spot checks to support their development and monitor practice. Leaders took positive action to address recruitment challenges by implementing contingency arrangements which helped maintain continuity of care. This included support from workers within the providers other services, and the use of a regular agency worker who had worked consistently at the service over an extended period, enabling positive relationships to develop with people using the service.


The service was responsive to people's changing needs. Reviews were completed regularly and additional reviews were undertaken when people's circumstances changed or concerns were identified. People and relatives were involved in decisions about care and support, and communication with families and partners was used to ensure care remained appropriate and effective.


Leaders had established governance and quality assurance systems to monitor the quality and safety of the service. Care plans, medication records, incidents, staff practice and customer feedback were regularly reviewed and audited. The registered manager was supported by quality assurance and governance teams, providing additional oversight and monitoring. Staff and relatives described a positive and supportive culture where concerns could be raised openly and acted upon. The service demonstrated a commitment to maintaining people's independence, promoting choice and ensuring care remained centred on people's individual outcomes.
 

People's experience of the service

Updated 7 July 2026

People’s experiences were gathered in person and by telephone to those receiving support and relatives involved in their care.


People using the service received care and support that was tailored to their individual needs and preferences. People were offered meaningful choices in their routines and personal care.
People told us staff were kind, respectful and reliable, and described positive relationships with the staff who supported them. One relative spoke very positively about the care provided and said the regular care worker was “perfect”, describing them as friendly, thorough and a “pleasure to be with”. They told us staff took time to complete care properly, treated the person with dignity and respect, and always left the home clean and tidy. Another person described staff as their “side kick” and said, “She looks after me. She does a very good job.”


People told us they were supported in ways that reflected their individual needs, preferences and routines. Care plans and daily records demonstrated a person-centred approach, with staff understanding people’s health conditions, risks and support requirements. People and relatives said staff knew them well, understood how they liked their care to be delivered and involved them in decisions about their support. One relative said, “I can’t praise (carer) highly enough.” The service promoted people’s independence and encouraged them to remain in control of their daily lives. People told us staff adapted support as their needs changed and communicated effectively about any concerns or developments.


People experienced reliable and responsive care. Relatives told us staff generally arrived at agreed times and completed care in line with planned routines. One relative said, “We’ve never been let down,” and described how concerns raised previously about inconsistent agency staff had been listened to and addressed quickly through changes made by the management team. People were informed when alternative staff would be supporting them, and the service worked to provide continuity of care wherever possible. A regular agency worker had also worked consistently at the service for an extended period, helping people to develop familiar and trusting relationships with those supporting them.


People felt comfortable discussing their care and any changes in their needs with staff. They told us staff listened to them, respected their choices, and responded appropriately when concerns about health or wellbeing were identified. Staff encouraged people to remain as independent as possible and helped them to maintain lifestyles and routines that were important to them.