Archived: Hazeldell Residential Home

During our inspection and through analysis of our inspection findings we considered the questions we always ask, is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led?

This is a summary of what we found

Is the service safe?

We found that the service was safe. When we arrived our identification was checked and we were asked to sign the visitor's book. This showed that the staff took the security of the building and the safety of the people who lived there seriously.

When we spoke with people they told us they felt safe living in the service and that they would speak with the staff if they had concerns.

We saw that the staffing levels were based on the assessed needs of the people who used the service. There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people’s needs. The manager told us that the rotas were developed in a way that reflected people’s individual needs.

The building was comfortable, clean and well maintained. We saw that the service had taken precautions to protect people from Infection and that staff had received appropriate infection control training.

We saw records which showed that health and safety checks were carried out in the service regularly and action was taken if equipment was found to be faulty or unsafe. This included regular visual checks and servicing of equipment such as hoists, the fire alarm panel and wheelchairs. Regular fire safety and legionella tests and checks were carried out, which showed that people were protected from unsafe or poorly maintained equipment.

We saw that the staff were provided with training in safeguarding vulnerable adults from abuse, the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which was updated every year. This meant that staff were provided with the information that they needed to ensure that people were safeguarded.

Is the service effective?

The people we spoke with told us that they were happy living in the service, one person told us, “I couldn’t manage at home anymore, things have looked up since I’ve been here. This is my home now.” Not all of the people were able to communicate with us easily, but people showed us by expression and body language that they felt safe and relaxed. During our observations of the care and support staff gave to people we saw that the service was effective in meeting people’s needs.

People's care records showed that care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure their safety and welfare. The records were regularly reviewed and updated which meant that staff were provided with up to date information about how people's needs were to be met.

We saw that the service was effective in assessing people’s nutritional needs and offered a good and varied menu, while ensuring that health needs and preferences were met.

Is the service caring?

We saw that the staff interacted with people who lived in the home in a caring, respectful and professional manner. Not all of the people were able to talk with us, but during the time we spent at the service we saw that people were comfortable, well dressed, looked smart and that staff were committed to caring for the people they supported.

The people we did speak with told us that they found the staff friendly and caring. One person told us, “I don’t usually have to ask for anything twice.” Another person said, “I’m glad I came here, everyone is so kind.”

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. People told us that the staff listened to their choices and acted on what they said. One person said, “I don’t have to do anything I don’t want to.” Another person told us that, “I’m asked, not told!”

The service provided meaningful activities and pastimes that were suited to people’s personality and interests. We saw people taking part in a quiz that was held in a way that was inclusive of all the people who wanted to take part. Other activities were available in the service including ‘pub’ evenings and film showings, when ice cream and popcorn was served during the intermission.

Is the service responsive?

We saw evidence that the service was flexible and made changes as required to ensure people were kept safe. For example staffing levels were based on the assessed needs of the people. The manager told us that staffing levels would be increased to ensure people’s needs were met.

People's care records showed that where concerns about their wellbeing had been identified the staff had taken appropriate action to ensure that people were provided with the support they needed. This included seeking support and guidance from health care professionals, including the doctor, the speech and language team and the dietician.

The people who used the service and their relatives were given the opportunity to complete annual satisfaction questionnaires. The manager said that the service responded to concerns raised with them through the survey. People and their families were also provided with the opportunity to participate in the running of the service by attending house meetings. Suggestions for improvement and issues that were highlighted as needing to be addressed were actioned and records were kept.

We saw that people's choices were taken into account and listened to in all aspects of the way the service was run. We saw that during dinner people were offered a variety of choices for their main meal and pudding. One person did not eat their meal and an alternative was offered to them.

Is the service well led?

The service had an effective quality assurance system in place and the records we examined showed that identified shortfalls were addressed promptly. This would ensure that the quality of the service was maintained.

The staff we spoke with told us that the manager was supportive, easy to approach and listened to what they had to say. The manager told us that they felt supported by the providers.

The provider sent us an action plan that set out what actions they were going to take so that they became compliant with this outcome. We carried out this inspection to check that they had taken the action identified in the action plan.

On this occasion we did not talk with the people who used the service, however we observed that people were relaxed and that the staff were attentive to their needs. Staff interacted with people in a friendly, respectful and professional manner.

Our observations indicated that people spent long periods without staff interaction or meaningful activities. The service did not offer people an environment, pastimes or activities that were specifically designed for people living with dementia.

During our inspection on 17 January 2013 we saw that the care plans carried contradictory information and did not fully express people’s needs. We also saw that staff did not properly record information and did not always take action to keep people pain free in a timely manner. During this inspection we saw that there were improvements in the way that care plans were completed and the way that information was recorded.

During our inspection on 17 January 2013 we identified that the service was not maintaining adequate records around people’s care needs and what action they had taken to maintain people’s welfare. During this inspection we saw that improvements had been made in managing records.

We looked at the way that medication was managed and recorded and found that the service was compliant with this regulation.

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.

During this inspection we saw that the care plans carried contradictory information and did not fully express people's needs. We found evidence that showed that staff did not properly record information and did not always take action to keep people pain free in a timely manner.

The majority of the people who lived at Hazeldell Residential Home were unable to voice their opinions due to them living with dementia. However, during a previous inspection on 9 July 2012 we spoke with three people who lived in the service and some of their relatives. They told us that they felt they were respected, had their privacy and dignity maintained, and that they were able to express their views and individuality.

The majority of the people who live at Hazeldell Residential Home were unable to voice their opinions due to them living with dementia. However, during our last inspection we spoke with three people living in the service and some of their relatives. They told us that they felt they were respected, had their privacy and dignity maintained, and that they were able to express their views and individuality.

Since the last inspection a new manager had been employed and we found that they and the provider had taken action and that they were compliant in all of the areas they had not been at the previous inspection.