You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Outstanding

Updated 11 April 2017

The inspection took place on 22 and 23 February 2017. The first day of the inspection was unannounced. Hartley Park Care Home provides residential and nursing care for people who may have mental health needs and living with dementia. Hartley Park Care home provides care and accommodation for up to 66 people. On the day of the inspection 66 people lived in the home. The service is owned by Abholly (2008) Ltd.

At the last inspection on 6 August 2014, the service was rated Outstanding in Effective and Well-Led. During this inspection, following feedback from staff and the inspection, the provider was making further improvements to the induction to ensure all staff felt supported and prepared to work at Hartley Park Care. We also inspected the service during a special, Chinese lunchtime meal which meant the mealtime experience was less planned and organised than our last inspection. These affected the rating previously obtained in this area. At this inspection we found the service was Outstanding in Caring, Responsive and Well-Led.

Why the service is rated outstanding:

The service had a registered manager in post. 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.

People, relatives and professionals told us all aspects of the service were excellent. People and relatives consistently told us they felt cared for, valued, and listened to and that their views mattered. There was a strong commitment to developing respectful, trusting relationships. Staff all demonstrated compassion and empathy. People’s care was based upon best practice and constantly reviewed. Care was planned around people and their preferences including their religious or cultural wishes. People were at the heart of care.

People receiving end of life care were treated compassionately, as were relatives.

Relatives advised us they could visit at any time and felt a part of a family. They described the service and support they received in exceptional terms.

The kitchen staff were passionate about their role to ensure people ate well to maintain and improve their health. People repeatedly commented on the “amazing, home cooked” food. Mealtimes were a positive, social experience. People told us meals were of excellent quality and quantity and there were always alternatives on offer for them to choose from. People were involved in planning the menus and their feedback on the food was sought.

People had their healthcare needs met. Staff quickly noticed when people’s health changed and were thoughtful, proactive and reflective as to why this might be, considering people’s physical health and social needs. People were supported to see a range of health and social care professionals including social workers, chiropodists, district nurses and doctors. Feedback from professionals was outstanding.

The atmosphere in the home was calm and we observed people taking part in the activities. There was a special Chinese food day during the inspection with people enjoying trying a spring roll and using chopsticks. Activities were plentiful and meaningful enabling people to live as full a life as possible. A range of group and one to one opportunities were available for those who liked to participate. People and relatives appreciated the activities co-ordinator.

There was a positive culture within the service. The management team had a clear vision about how they wished the service to be provided. Values were shared by the whole staff team. Staff talked about ‘personalised care’ and ‘respecting people’s choices’ and had a clear aim about improving people’s lives and opportunities.

There was a management structure in the service which provided clear lines of responsibility and accountability. A registered manager was in post that had overall responsibility for the service. They were supported by the providers, unit managers and other senior staff who had designated management responsibilities. People told us they knew who to speak to in the office and any changes or concerns were dealt with swiftly and efficiently.

Feedback received by the service and outcomes from audits were used to aid learning and drive improvement across the service. The registered manager and staff monitored the quality of the service by regularly undertaking a range of audits and speaking with people to ensure they were happy with the service they received. People and their relatives told us the management team were fantastic, approachable and included them in discussions about their care and the running of the service. Hartley Park was described by many relatives as “A five star home”.

People told us they felt confident, safe and secure using the service. People were comfortable approaching staff. There were risk assessments in place to help reduce any risks related to people’s care and support needs. Staff had received training in how to recognise and report abuse and were confident any allegations would be taken seriously and investigated to help ensure people were protected.

People were kept safe by suitable staffing levels which were adjusted when required, to meet people’s needs. Relatives told us there were enough staff on duty and we observed unhurried interactions between people and staff. This meant that people’s needs were met in a timely manner. Recruitment practices were safe. Checks were carried out prior to staff commencing their employment to ensure they had the correct characteristics and values to work with vulnerable people.

People’s medicines were given safely. Staff were patient and encouraging as they supported people to take their medicines. Robust checks were in place to ensure people had the right medicine at the right time.

Staff had received an induction when they commenced work training relevant to their role. There was a thorough system in place to continue to enhance staff skills and knowledge to support quality care. Staff received excellent support and supervision in their roles to help ensure the values and expectations of care delivery were understood.

People received support from staff who had an in depth knowledge of them and went the extra mile to get to know them. Research based initiatives such as all staff spending five minutes a day with people built upon this. People, relatives and healthcare professionals spoke very highly of the staff and the support provided.

The registered manager and staff had attended training on the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

Staff were knowledgeable about the Mental Capacity Act and how this applied to their role. Where people lacked the capacity to make decisions for themselves, processes ensured that their rights were protected. Where people’s liberty was restricted in their best interests, the correct legal procedures had been followed. People were involved in planning their care and staff sought their consent prior to providing them with assistance. Staff advocated for people to ensure they received the best possible outcomes.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 11 April 2017

The service remained good.

There were sufficient staff on duty to meet people’s needs safely. Staff were recruited safely.

People were protected by staff who could identify abuse and who would act to protect people.

People had risk assessments in place to mitigate risks associated with living at the service.

People were cared for in a clean environment.

Effective

Good

Updated 11 April 2017

The service was effective.

People received support from staff that knew them well and had the knowledge and skills to meet their needs.

Staff were well supported, trained and motivated to deliver high quality care.

Induction processes were being improved to ensure new staff had the skills and support they needed.

Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and sought consent whenever possible.

People received a healthy, varied diet. Maintaining and improving people’s nutritional status was important.

Caring

Outstanding

Updated 11 April 2017

The service was exceptionally caring and this area had improved to outstanding.

People were looked after by dedicated staff that treated them with compassion and respect. People and visitors spoke highly of staff. People felt special by thoughtful acts of kindness from staff.

People felt in control of their care, involved and staff listened to them. People’s and relative opinions were valued.

Staff went above and beyond to ensure that people were treated

with kindness and knew they mattered. Staff spoke about the people they were looking after with fondness.

People’s end of life care was personalised, dignified and pain free. People’s wishes for their last days made possible by exceptionally caring staff that went above and beyond. Relatives were also cared for with tenderness both during and following a person’s death.

Care was centred on people's individual needs. Staff maintained

people’s dignity and used creative ways to enhance their well-being.

Responsive

Outstanding

Updated 11 April 2017

The service was responsive, exceptionally personalised and this area had improved to outstanding.

People received empathic, individual care and support, which was responsive to their changing needs. People’s outcomes were improved due to individualised care.

Activities were creative, varied, abundant and very much enjoyed by people. People regularly went out into the local community and the local community were invited to participate in life at the home. Social isolation was reduced by meaningful engagement in hobbies they enjoyed.

People were at the heart of planning their care and their views and wishes were listened to and acted on. Innovative ideas were used to seek people’s choices.

Changes in people's needs were quickly recognised and appropriate; prompt action taken, including the involvement of

external professionals where necessary.

Care records were written to reflect people’s individual needs and were regularly reviewed and updated.

People were actively encouraged to give their views and raise

concerns or complaints because the service viewed concerns

and complaints as part of driving improvement.

Well-led

Outstanding

Updated 11 April 2017

The service remained outstanding.

The leadership and management of the service were described in exceptional terms.

The leadership team promoted strong values and a person

centred culture.

Staff were motivated and proud to work for the service and shared the values of the leadership team. These were owned by all and underpinned practice.