Archived: Hammerson House

We inspected this service on 12 January 2016. The inspection was unannounced. Hammerson House is a Jewish care home registered to provide accommodation and nursing care for up to sixty eight people. At the time of our inspection there were thirty eight people living at the residential and nursing care service. There were an additional nine people living in the supported living wing of the building, where people lived independently without any care provided by staff. This inspection was of the residential and nursing care services only.

The service was located in a purpose built block, on two floors with access to a front and back garden area.

We previously inspected the service on 4 July 2013 when the service was found to be meeting the regulations we looked at.

Hammerson House had a registered manager at the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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.

During the inspection there was a calm and pleasant atmosphere. People using the service informed us that they felt safe living at Hammerson House.

All the people we talked with confirmed they were treated with dignity and respect, and we observed staff interactions with residents during the inspection day and noted them to be warm, engaging and reassuring.

Care records including risk assessments and care plans were up to date and detailed. People were supported to maintain good health by the nursing staff at the home and through regular access to community healthcare professionals such as GPs and local hospital services.

People had their medicines managed safely. People received their medicines as prescribed and on time. Nursing staff ensured safe storage and management of medicines.

Staff had been carefully recruited and provided with training to enable them to care effectively for people. Staff felt supported and there was always a nurse on duty. Supervision was due every second month, but this has not always taken place for all staff. Training was up to date for staff for mandatory courses with the exception of food hygiene, however, the registered manager had dates for the course later in the month.

People told us the management was a visible presence within the home. Staff talked positively about their jobs telling us they enjoyed their work and felt valued. The staff we met were caring, kind and compassionate.

Staff knew how to recognise and report any concerns or allegations of abuse and described what action they would take to protect people against harm. Staff told us they felt confident any incidents or allegations would be fully investigated. We saw there were enough staff to meet people's needs.

There was a very full and varied programme of activities at the service and we saw there were a range of trips for shopping or cultural events people could sign up for. There was a café on site with a small shop staffed by volunteers. There was also access to a physiotherapist on site five days a week.

People’s religious needs were actively facilitated by staff, and staff were able to tell us how they responded to people’s cultural needs.

The home had arrangements in place for quality assurance. Regular audits and checks had been carried out by the registered manager.

We found the premises were clean and tidy. Measures were in place for infection control. There was a record of essential inspections and maintenance carried out. The building was fully accessible and maintained to a good standard.

The service had plans for renovations in the near future so the service was not admitting people permanently to the service at the time of the inspection, however people could be admitted for a short term respite placement.

Staff told us that they felt supported in their roles and that they had had recent training. We asked them how they had applied the training to caring roles. One care worker told us that recent dementia training allowed them to place peoples' occasional challenging behaviour into context.

We looked at provider records and saw that they regularly assessed and monitored the quality of the service provided. For example, a June 2013 infection control audit showed that hand wash basins were cleaned and intact; and that waste bags were stored safely from the public.

Care records seen by us indicated that the care provided was closely monitored. People told us that their healthcare needs had been attended to and they could see the doctor if they needed to. Two healthcare professionals stated that people were well cared for and they had no concerns. The home had a lively and varied programme of social and therapeutic activities. People were seen participating in these activities. Ornaments and paintings done by people were on display.

People who use the service spoke well of staff and indicated that staff were attentive and capable. Staff had been provided with essential training and were knowledgeable regarding their responsibilities.

There were arrangements in place to ensure that the service provided was of a high quality. The feedback received was that people were satisfied with the quality of care and service provided at the home.