Huntercombe Hall Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. Care plans were reviewed. Some relatives told us they were aware their loved ones had care plans but were not always aware it had been reviewed. Staff told us handovers were actioned where staff were made aware of people’s assessed needs. A member of staff told us, “Relatives are asked about what they would like to see in the care plan”.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. People’s care plans included information on how they wished for their care to be delivered. Staff told us they knew what to do if they identified a pressure sore and when supporting people with nutrition and hydration. Staff told us, “I would take a photo, upload onto the system and let the nurse know. I am aware of SaLT (speech and language therapy) and again, would report any swallowing difficulties to the nurse on duty” and “I have been shown how to assist a resident with their food and drink. I know I have to be patient and give each individual the time that they need”.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services. We received mostly positive feedback from professionals. The registered manager worked with multi-disciplinary professionals. A member of staff told us, “We have a hospice nurse come in when a resident is end of life. They are helpful and we work together well to do what is best for the resident”. Another member of staff told us if a person was end of life, the home would provide a computer and information for the external nurse and also, “The nurse in charge will speak to [external professional] during the shift and liaise with them on the telephone if needed. This is always mentioned at handover”. A professional told us the care staff were always available to answer all questions relating to people living at the home and the registered manager had, “always exhibited professional transparency and accountability in any issues or concerns raised by family members and always endeavoured to address the issue at hand and take on board any subsequent learning outcomes or developments”.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support. People’s care plans guided staff on when people needed support and what they could achieve on their own. Staff told us if people wished to get ready on their own with minimal assistance, staff respected this and told us, “I know to report any signs of unusual confusion, incontinence and other changes to the nurse”.

A professional told us, “My experience of the care at Huntercombe is overwhelmingly positive. The nurses and carers have a genuine caring attitude toward the residents”, and people “are treated with respect and the staff members know their baseline status and are quick to identify any changes in their condition”. Another professional told us, “The current manager and staff work well with myself, refer often,seek advice and input from our service and will act upon any recommendations we make”.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves. Care records showed people were supported by health professionals, for example, the respiratory team, the GP and SaLT. A member of staff told us, “There are regular health reviews in place and food and fluid intake is monitored. We encourage them (people) to change position if they are at risk of pressure sores”. Professionals told us the staff made time to refer any concerns about people’s well-being and risks and the registered manager had made some changes to how the ward round was managed and documented to increase efficiency and to ensure instructions given by the professional were clear and carried out appropriately.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment. The service completed mental capacity assessments. The registered manager had a mental capacity assessment and a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) tracker to support with oversight. Our observations throughout the day of the site visit identified staff asking people for consent, for example, before entering a person’s room and when administering medication. Staff had completed mental capacity act and DoLS training. Care plans included guidance tor staff to follow for the delivery of people’s care in an inclusive person-centred way.