Archived: Hunts Lane Nursing Home

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with staff and reviewing records

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service caring?

From our observations, we saw that people who used the service experienced positive relationships with staff. We saw people laughing and enjoying interactions with staff, we also observed that staff spoke with people in a pleasant manner.

People were treated with dignity and respect and staff had a clear understanding of these terms. We were told about the ways in which people's privacy would be respected, for example by knocking on doors before entering people's rooms.

Is the service responsive?

We spoke with a visiting GP on the day of our inspection, who told us that medical advice was sought promptly when people in the home were ill. We were told that staff provided good support for people during health appointments.

Our observations during the day of our inspection showed that staff were responsive to people's needs and emotions. During the lunch time meal, staff reacted promptly when a person needed support to help them eat their food safely. Another person was supported when they were becoming upset and anxious.

Is the service effective?

Support plans contained information about people and the way they liked to be supported. Care files were in the process of being reorganised and updated and it was therefore difficult to find some pieces of information. However, we saw evidence that work was being done to update support plans and key information, such as people's moving and handling needs.

Important information about people's care and support was recorded so that all staff would be aware. For example we saw that information about people's fluid intake was included in handover information, so that staff arriving on shift would know whether a person needed extra support to drink more fluids.

Staff at the home worked with other professionals to ensure that people's health needs were met. For one individual we heard about the exercises that staff were supporting them to complete, on the advice of a physiotherapist.

Is the service safe?

Staff had received training in safeguarding vulnerable adults and understood what was meant by the term whistle blowing. There was also a policy in place for responding to allegations of abuse, which provided staff with consistent guidance to follow.

Risk assessments were used to help staff support people in a safe way. We saw, for example that a Waterlow assessment was completed with people to assess whether they were at a high risk of developing a pressure ulcer.

People were weighed regularly and records kept of their fluid intake to protect them from the risks associated with malnutrition and dehydration.

Is the service well led?

There was a registered manager in place at the home at the time of our inspection. There was also a team of registered nurses to lead each shift.

There were systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service provided. The views of people who used the service were sought as part of service user meetings. A manager from another home within the organisation visited the home on a monthly basis, to check on particular aspects of the service such as health and safety.

We were provided with evidence that the service was compliant during this inspection.

We did not speak with people receiving a service about this outcome area. This was because we were looking at the training and support mechanisms for staff.

We spoke with the manager and three members of staff who confirmed what actions had been taken since our last inspection to improve the communication between some staff. This work was continuing with the team including improving the support mechanisms that were in place including team meetings, one to one supervisions and team training.

This was a planned inspection. However, we followed up areas of non compliance relating to the environment and support of staff from our inspection in November 2012. The provider had taken appropriate action in relation to the environment.

During our inspection we spoke with five staff and the registered manager. We observed people in the communal areas of the home. People were being treated in a respectful manner and the care and support was delivered sensitively.

People were supported to be involved in decisions about their care, where decisions were more complex then these were made within the legal framework. Thus ensuring decisions were made in the best interest of the person involving other professionals.

People's care and welfare needs were being met. This included health and personal care, as well as ensuring people were engaged in activities in the home and the local community.

People were supported by staff that had received training appropriate to their role. Staff were knowledgeable about the people they were supporting. At the last inspection some concerns were raised around conflict within the staff team. This remains outstanding. However, an action plan was in place to address these concerns.

During our visit we spoke with three members of staff, a visiting professional and the registered manager. We observed people in the communal areas of the home.

People were being treated in a respectful manner and were involved in decisions about their care where they were able to. There was information to guide staff on the rights of the individuals and how to support them with making decisions.

People were encouraged to take part in activities in the community.

Staff demonstrated a good awareness of how people communicated including if they were unhappy and gave examples how they would address this. We observed positive interactions between the staff and the individuals living in the home. Individuals appeared relaxed and comfortable with the staff that were supporting them.

Staff received appropriate training to enable them to support the people living in Hunts Lane. However, there was a lack of systems to support and supervise staff. There were some concerns raised about the conflict within the team during this visit.