We carried out a review of the data available to us about Hanford Court Care Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Hanford Court Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Hanford Court Care Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 61 older people. At the time of the inspection there were 51 people using the service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
• There was a booking system in place which had been implemented after consultation with people and their relatives. The visits were restricted to one person, the visiting room was accessed directly from outside the building and time was set aside to ensure the area was thoroughly cleaned between each visit. The provider had continued to look at ways to develop and were in the process of implementing an electronic booking system for visits.
• The registered manager had carried out regular wellbeing assessments for people who used the service to ensure signs to suggest there had been a deterioration in their mental health were identified and acted on.
• Discussions had been held with staff to reduce their anxieties and risk assessments were carried out with staff who were at high risk to ensure their safety when supporting people. The provider had implemented an emotional support helpline for staff to access if required.
• There was a consistent staff group at the service, who had been trained in different roles to ensure there were enough staff available to support people. This had been part of the provider’s contingency plan to ensure staff movement between services was decreased to lower the risk of cross infection.
• The provider had made the decision to keep some vacancies to ensure they had extra rooms to allow for movement and zoning of people if there was an outbreak within the service.
Hanford Court is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to people aged 65. The service was supporting 61 people in one adapted building across three floors at the time of the inspection. Each floor has separate adapted facilities. One floor specialises in supporting people living with dementia.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People received an exceptionally caring service. People and relatives told us they felt staff were all very caring. People were completely engaged in the service and were supported to be involved in ways which made them feel valued. People’s needs, wishes and preferences were well understood and used to provide exceptionally person-centred care. People and relatives were very complimentary about how well they felt supported by staff. People were respected and the service was focussed on providing people with support to remain independent.
People were safeguarded from abuse and risks to safety were mitigated. There were enough staff available and safe recruitment practices were followed. People received medicines as prescribed and were protected from the risk of cross infection. Where incidents happened, learning was in place to prevent reoccurrence.
People had their needs assessed and clear plans were in place to meet them. People were supported in an adapted environment and staff understood their individual health needs. People had support to maintain a healthy diet. People received support from trained staff who were well supported in their role.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People received person centred care and were supported to maintain important relationships and follow their interests. At the end of their lives people had support which was based on their wishes and preferences. People understood how to complain and felt listened to by the service.
The provider had systems in place to check on the quality of the service and engaged people, staff and relatives in sharing their views. The provider understood their responsibilities and the registered manager and staff understood their role. Partnership working was encouraged and the provider had adopted a learning culture.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 13 June 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
People continued to receive safe care. There were enough staff to support them and they were recruited to ensure that they were safe to work with people. People were consistently protected from the risk of harm and received their prescribed medicines safely.
The care that people received continued to be effective. They were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Staff received training and support to be able to care for people well. They ensured that people were supported to maintain good health and nutrition.
People continued to have positive relationships with the staff who were caring and treated people with respect and kindness. There were lots of opportunities for them to get involved in activities and pursue their interests. Staff knew them well and understood how to care for them in a personalised way. There were plans in place which detailed peoples likes and dislikes and these were regularly reviewed. People knew how to raise a concern or make a complaint and the provider had implemented effective systems to manage any complaints that they received.
People and their relatives were included in developing the service and found the manager approachable. There were quality systems in place which were effective in continually developing the quality of the care that was provided to them.
Further information is in the detailed findings below
We inspected Hanford Court Care Home on 24 and 25 February 2015. The inspection was unannounced.
The provider is registered to provide accommodation, personal and nursing care for up to 61 people. This includes care for people with physical needs and dementia care needs. At the time of our inspection, 59 people used the service.
There was 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
The provider was compliant at our last inspection of the service on 18 June 2014.
People were protected from the risks of abuse because staff understood what constituted abuse and took action when people were at risk of harm. There were appropriate numbers of staff employed to meet people’s needs. People’s care needs was planned and reviewed regularly to meet their needs. Their care records reflected the care they received.
People were cared for by staff that had the knowledge and skills required to care and support them. Care staff demonstrated a good knowledge of the care needs of people and how high quality care could be provided. Staff had regular training, and were supported to have additional training which was specific to their roles and responsibilities.
Legal requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 were followed when people were unable to make certain decisions about their care. People liberties were not unlawfully restricted. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the DoLS set out the requirements that ensure where appropriate; decisions are made in people’s best interest.
People were supported to have adequate amounts of food and drink. Staff were proactive when they identified that people were at risk of weight loss, and ensured that these people were supported in a sensitive manner to eat and drink. A variety of food was offered at meal times and people could choose what they wished to eat or drink. Meal times were viewed as a social event which people looked forward to.
People had access to other health care professionals and were supported to attend healthcare appointments when they needed it. A GP came to the service regularly to review people’s care and took appropriate action when concerns were identified. Other complementary therapies were provided at the home to promote the general wellbeing of people.
There was a visible culture of person-centred care at the service. The provider had devised various ways of ensuring that people’s individual needs were met in order for the environment to feel as homely as possible. People were supported to be as independent as possible.
People were treated with dignity and respect. People told us the staff were kind and treated them with dignity and respect. The service provided exceptional care to people and their families before and after death.
Best practice guidance was used in the care of people who lived with dementia. The environment was designed to be ‘dementia friendly’.
People’s care plans were tailored to meet their individual needs. Care plans detailed how people wished to be cared for and these wishes were respected. People’s care was planned in partnership with them. Their relatives were actively involved in their care.
The service demonstrated a strong value to promote people’s personal interests and hobbies. Creative ways were used to enable the people who used the service to achieve fulfilling lives. Social activities were organised to be in line with people’s personal interests and there was a lively atmosphere at the service. The service had strong links with the local community.
People told us they did not have any concern nor had anything to complain about. However, they said they knew how to raise concerns and were confident that their concerns would be dealt with. People were encouraged to give feedback about the service. The provider had an effective system in place for dealing with concerns or complaints.
People who used the service, their relatives and the staff were very complimentary about the registered manager of the service. People told us that they were accessible and approachable. A positive and open culture was promoted at the service. People who used the service and staff were encouraged and supported to provide feedback on the service. The provider had effective systems in place to review the quality of the service provided.
We saw that people were treated with respect by the staff that cared for them. One person said, "When I first came to look at the home I thought it was a four star hotel, and it's lived up to that'. A member of staff told us, 'It's nice here. We treat the people well and they appreciate it and are nice to us. Everyone is happy'.
Care was planned and delivered in a way which kept people safe and protected their rights.
There were systems in place to ensure the safe storage and administration of drugs.
Staff had the required skills and experience to enable them to provide appropriate care.
Audits and surveys were conducted which enabled the management team to monitor, analyse and respond to issues and people's needs.