Archived: Hopton Court

Updated 18 August 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection took place on 18 May 2015 this visit was unannounced. At the time of our inspection there were 44 people living at the home. The inspection team consisted of two adult social care inspectors, a specialist advisor who has a nursing background and an expert by experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. During the inspection we spoke to seven people who lived at the home, two visiting relatives and eight members of staff. We also spoke to the registered manager and area manager of the home.

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of the people in the home. We spent time observing care practices in the home and staff interactions with people. We observed meal times taking place and activities being carried out in the communal areas of the home. We spoke to a number of people in the communal areas of the home. We looked at the environment of the home. We looked at documents and records that related to peoples care, and the management of the home such as training records, policies and procedures. We also used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Before the inspection we reviewed all the information held about the home. The provider had not been asked to provide a provider information return (PIR). This is a document that provides relevant up to date information about the home that is provided by the manager or owner of the home to the Care Quality Commission.

Updated 18 August 2015

We inspected Hopton Court on the 18 May 2015 this visit was unannounced. Our last inspection took place in June 2014 and at that time we found the service was meeting the regulations.

Hopton Court is a 45 bedded purpose built care home close to Armley Town Street in Leeds. Care is provided on two floors for up to 45 older adults living with dementia.

The home had a registered manager in place. 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.

We spoke to people and asked if they felt safe in their home. They told us that they felt safe. People told us they felt that they could ask staff anything, and that they could walk about their home feeling safe. Staff were clear about their responsibility to report concerns and were aware of whistleblowing procedures and how to use them. There was an up to date safeguarding policy in place.

We found there were not at all times, enough staff to ensure people’s needs were met safely and that people were properly supervised to ensure their safety. We observed people in the home were left unsupervised for up to 30 minutes in communal areas. This meant that people were not being supported in a safe manner.

We found the service was meeting the legal requirements relating to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS). However, we found an issue in relation to the administration of covert medication.

We looked at the arrangements in place for the management of medicines at the home. We found there were issues with regard to the records not being completed by staff for two people who required topical medication to be administered.

People we spoke to told us they were happy living at the home. Staff appeared to have good relationships with people and spoke in a friendly and kind manner with them. People appeared at ease with the staff. People’s privacy and dignity were respected and staff knocked on people’s doors before entering their rooms.

The home provided care for people living with dementia. There was no evidence of national guidance or best practice on which the home based the care they provided for people living with dementia.

People were supported to have enough suitable food and drink when and how they wanted it and staff understood people’s nutritional needs.

From our observations it was clear staff knew people well. Staff were trained in supporting the people in the home.

Records we looked at showed that staff had not had supervisions since November 2014. The registered manager told us they were aware of this and had plans in place to meet with all staff.

Assessments of care and care plans were in place within the home and contained a detailed history of the person.

Records we looked at showed there were systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service. However, we found a number of issues during the inspection which the provider had failed to identify through an effective system of quality assurance. This meant the system was not robust.

Staff said there were good leadership within the service which promoted an open culture within the home.

We saw there was a complaints procedure in place which was displayed in the home. The survey’s which were in place for the home stated that family and other professionals knew how to complain. The home had received complaints and these were dealt with promptly.

We found four breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.