Haddon Hall Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

People’s care and support needs were assessed before admission into the home, to ensure these could be met. Regular reviews were undertaken to ensure the support people received remained relevant and effective to them. These involved the people and their relatives. People were encouraged to remain as independent as possible, where safe to do so. Staff had access to information to ensure they could meet people’s assessed needs correctly. The provider had systems in place to ensure there were oversight of people’s needs, especially where there were changes. Referrals were made to external professionals to support people to live as healthy a lifestyle as possible.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Some staff told us they do not always receive information on new admissions in a timely manner. However, most staff said people’s needs were assessed appropriately, and these were regularly reviewed, when people’s needs changed. Staff told us people and their relatives were involved in this process.

The provider had processes in place to ensure people’s needs were appropriately assessed prior to admission. People’s care and support was reviewed 6 weeks after admission, with the involvement of healthcare professionals and any other key people.

We spoke with people about their care and treatment being assessed and regularly reviewed. We were told the provider took time to get to know people, including working with appropriate healthcare professionals. Relatives told us how the provider considers people’s needs, including finer details about the person. We were told, “Haddon Hall worked with us, explained everything and we felt at ease to ask questions”. The provider made sure equipment was available to keep people safely, prior to their admission. For example, sensor mats and a low profiling bed.

The provider told us people's communication needs and abilities were assessed during the pre-admission process. This was to ensure care plans reflected people’s needs appropriately. The provider told us how they used alternative methods of communication for people. This gave people the opportunity to express their wishes and mitigated the risk of isolation. The provider had reading materials in place to suit all people. For example, using a show plate of food options to enable people living with dementia to make their own choices. Staff delivered care and treatment which was based on national guidance and evidence-based practice. Staff told us how they encouraged people to make choices about the way their care was provided and respected people's decisions and personal preferences.

People were provided with adequate nutrition and hydration and their needs were met in line with current guidance. The provider offered a wide range of nutritious food, and people’s choices were respected. People’s nutritional needs were assessed and monitored. Records showed staff had acted quickly to respond to change in people’s needs or behaviours.

People and their relatives were involved in the care and support which were being delivered at Haddon Hall. We were told staff spent time getting to know people, including important things about them. For example, a person told us, “The staff are caring and take time to listen and go out of their way to know people”. The provider had various options of food and drink available to people, including a glass of wine with their meal. People’s bedrooms were personalised, and each person had a memory box outside of their bedroom with their memorable items.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

The manager told us of the many services they worked with to ensure people had opportunities to improve their outcomes and lead healthy lives. This included the GP, advance practice nurse (APN), dementia support teams and speech and language therapy (SALT). The manager told us they worked with families through people’s end of life journeys to ensure they also had the support needed.

Evidence showed that staff acted promptly when people's health deteriorated. For example, staff liaised with healthcare professionals to ensure people were comfortable towards the end of their life. There was information in people's care records about their health and general wellbeing. Guidance was available to assist staff to care for people who had healthcare issues.

People were supported to manage their health and wellbeing. People told us how their independence was promoted. For example, supporting people to be mobile with the use of adaptive equipment. A relative told us, “The staff have got to know my family member quickly. They have invested their time in finding what their likes and dislikes are and they have supported them to be as independent as they can”.

People who used the service had opportunities to feedback about the care provided to them. People and relative surveys were completed twice a year. The provider had systems in place to monitor this, to continuously improve. The service had a quality assurance system. Audits took place monthly. These audits included areas such as medicines, care plans, health and safety and staffing arrangements. Following these audits, action had been taken to rectify any areas of improvement noted.

The provider held regular meetings with people and their relatives. These were held at different times to cater for people’s availabilities. Relatives told us communication from the provider was excellent, and they were always informed of any improvements or changes. A relative shared, “It is good to be surrounded by people that are pro-active and care”.

The provider had a resident of the day system in place where each aspect of a person’s care was evaluated monthly, and their views were sought on the service and any changes they wished to make. The service had regular clinical governance meetings to ensure known risks were monitored and evaluated. The manager told us the service had systems in place to ensure people received timely referrals to external agencies to support people’s treatment and how this information was used to plan people’s care. The manager told us of the allocations system in place which ensured continuity of care for people.

People told us they were given choices. For example, what they would like to eat and drink, what they wear and if they want a bath or a shower. A relative told us, “I feel my family member is treated fairly and the staff are very respectful”.

Care plans included information about people's capacity to make decisions and provide consent to their care. There were details of people's next of kin or others who advocated for them. People were supported to make decisions. Records also supported where decisions had been made in people’s best interest.

The manager told us of the various systems in place to ensure people had the opportunity to express their views and consent to the care provided. The manager told us how people’s mental capacity was assessed and how best interest decisions were made involving people’s representatives, when these were required.