14 September 2016
During a routine inspection
The service supports people with rehabilitation and to care for themselves independently before returning to their own homes following a life event such as a hospital admission or an illness. A multi-disciplinary team was on site that supported people, including rehabilitation workers, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, pharmacists and nurses. There was also a GP attached to the service. People’s stays were usually for an initial period of six weeks with regular reviews.
The service had a registered manager. 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.
Medicines were safely handled to protect people. Risks were comprehensively assessed and plans were put in place to minimise these. Risk plans were subject to weekly review in consultation with people.
Staff were able to tell us what they would do to ensure people were safe and people told us they felt safe at the service. The service had sufficient suitable staff to care for people and staff were safely recruited. The environment was safe for people and monitoring checks were regularly carried out. People were protected by the infection control procedures in the service.
Staff had received training to ensure that people received care appropriate for their needs. Training was up to date across a range of relevant areas.
Staff had received up to date training in Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff understood that people should be consulted about their care and they understood the principles of the MCA and DoLS.
People’s nutrition and hydration needs were met. People enjoyed the meals. Specialist advice around people’s health care and rehabilitation needs was sought from the multi-disciplinary team on site and from other specialists when required, and this was followed.
People were treated with kindness and compassion. We saw staff had a good rapport with people whilst treating them with dignity and respect. Staff had knowledge and understanding of people’s needs and worked well as a team. Care plans provided detailed information about people’s individual needs and preferences. Records and observations provided evidence that people were treated in a way which encouraged them to feel valued and cared about.
People were supported to engage in daily activities they enjoyed and which were in line with their preferences and interests. Staff were responsive to people’s wishes and understood people’s personal histories and social networks so that they could support them in the way they preferred. Care plans were kept up to date and reviewed at least weekly. People were given opportunities to take part in drawing up their care plans, their reviews and to give their views which were acted upon.
People told us their complaints were responded to and the results of complaint investigations were clearly recorded. Everyone we spoke with told us that if they had concerns they were always addressed by the registered manager who responded quickly.
The service had an effective quality assurance system in place. Henesy House was well managed and staff were well supported in their role. The registered manager had a clear understanding of their role. They consulted appropriately with people who lived at the service, people who were important to them, staff and health care professionals, in order to identify required improvements and put these in place. Records around good governance were clear and accurate and led to planned improvements.