Archived: Hovenden - Care Home with Nursing Physical Disabilities

Updated 28 January 2015

Our inspection team consisted of an inspector, and a specialist advisor. A specialist advisor is a professional who has expertise in an area relevant to the service being inspected. The specialist advisor had expertise in physical health.

Prior to our inspection we reviewed the information we held about the service and the provider. We asked the provider to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. During our inspection we spoke with a visiting professional about their experiences of care within the home.

At our previous inspection we had found the provider to be compliant with the areas we looked at.

We spoke with four people living at Hovenden House, one relative, one nurse, four care staff, the registered manager and the activities coordinator.

We observed care and support in communal areas and also looked at the kitchen and some people’s bedrooms, as well as a range of records about people’s care and how the home was managed.

We looked at five people’s care records in detail, to help us decide whether or not people were receiving care that was safe and meeting their assessed needs. We also looked at three staff files and management records such as quality audits and complaints records.

Updated 28 January 2015

People and their relatives were very happy with the service. In addition, our own observations and the records we looked at supported this view. People were cared for safely. Staff were able to tell us about how to keep people safe. The provider acted in accordance with the Mental Capacity act (2005) (MCA) and deprivation of liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The provisions of the MCA are used to protect people who might not be able to make informed decisions on their own about the care or treatment they received. This includes decisions about depriving people of their liberty so that they get the care and treatment they need where there is no less restrictive way of achieving this. If the location is a care home CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the DoLS, and to report on what we find. At the time of our inspection there was one person who was subject to DoLS.

We found that people’s health care needs were assessed, and care planned and delivered to meet those needs. People had access to other healthcare professionals such as a dietician and a chiropodist.

People were supported to eat enough to keep them healthy. People had access to a range of snacks and drinks during the day and had choices at mealtimes. Where people had special dietary requirements we saw that these were provided for.

We looked at records of fluid intake and found there were gaps in the completion of the record which could put people at risk of not having sufficient fluids. We also found gaps in the records which recorded when people were weighed. This meant there was not a complete record for staff to use to monitor changes in people’s health.

People had their privacy and dignity were respected and made positive comments about staff. We saw that care took into account people’s preferences and that staff obtained people’s consent before providing care.

Staff were provided with both internal and external training on a variety of subjects to ensure that they had the skills to meet people’s needs. Staff knew how to raise concerns. We found people and relatives were clear about the process for raising concerns and were confident that they had a voice in the running of the service.