Background to this inspection
Updated
17 November 2018
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 was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2014 and to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Before the inspection we reviewed information we held about the service including statutory notifications. Statutory notifications include information about important events which the provider is required to send us. We also reviewed the provider information return (PIR) submitted to us. This is information that the provider is required to send to us, which gives us some key information about the service and tells us what the service does well and any improvements they plan to make.
The inspection was unannounced and carried out by two inspectors, an assistant inspector and two experts by experience. An expert by experience is a person who had experience of using this type of service or has a family member who has used this type of service.
During the inspection we spoke with 16 people who used the service, five relatives and visitors, 12 staff members and the registered manager. We received information from service commissioners and health and social care professionals. We viewed information relating to nine people’s care and support. We also reviewed records relating to the management of the service.
We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us due to their complex health needs.
Updated
17 November 2018
This inspection was carried out on 23 October 2018 and was unannounced. At their last inspection on 15 August 2017, they were found to be meeting the standards we inspected, however they were rated as requires improvement. At this inspection we found that they had continued to meet all the standards and had improved their rating to Good. However, consistently promoting people’s dignity was an area that required improvement.
Hatfield Residential and Nursing Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
Hatfield Residential and Nursing Home provides accommodation for up to 118 older people, this included people with nursing care needs and some people living with dementia. At the time of the inspection there were 102 people living there.
The service had a manager who was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People told us that staff were kind and caring. However, we found that people’s dignity was not always promoted by staff. This related to a lack of ironing of people’s clothes and ensuring beds were made properly.
Confidentially and privacy were promoted. Visitors were made welcome.
People were supported by staff who knew how to recognise and report any risks to people’s wellbeing. Accidents and incidents were reviewed to reduce a reoccurrence and there were effective infection control practices in place. Medicines were managed safely and people received them promptly.
People were supported by enough staff who were recruited safely. Staff received a robust induction, regular training and felt supported.
People enjoyed a variety of food and drink, and there was appropriate access to external health and social care professionals. Staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and adhered to its principles.
People said the care met their needs and people’s care plans included information to guide staff. People were supported at the end of their life with compassion and care.
The activities plan would benefit from further development to ensure activities reached everyone but people were happy with what was offered.
People and staff were positive about the registered manager and how the service was run. The management team kept an overview of the service and addressed any issues. The quality assurance systems were effective and complaints were responded to and people’s views were sought.