Hurst Park Court

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

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last inspection we rated this key question requires improvement. At this inspection the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

At our last inspection, we found the provider was in breach of regulation 11 (need for consent), and regulation 17 (good governance). This was due to the provider failing to ensure care and treatment was obtained in line with law and guidance and failing to keep accurate and complete records for people. At this inspection we found the provider had taken enough action and was no longer in breach of regulation.  

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, well-being and communication needs with them.

People’s care plans evidenced people’s needs had been assessed. Care plans were written in a way which considered the person as a whole and reflected people’s history, enabling people to be cared for in line with their choice and preference. Care plans contained details for staff on how to best communicate with the person.

Where people had specific health care needs which required regular monitoring, such as dietary and skin integrity needs, assessment tools were used to help assess needs, to help ensure people received care which was appropriate for them.   

Staff told us they had a good level of information about people’s needs and how they were to be met. Staff explained how they were kept up to date with people’s current and changing needs through their care plans and through daily handover meetings.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

We observed for people who were at risk of losing weight, the provider had taken timely action to make appropriate referrals to the dietitian to ensure the person was fully supported with their nutritional requirements.  

Staff were knowledgeable about people’s dietary needs and preferences. Kitchen staff held information in the kitchen about people’s dietary needs, likes and dislikes and prepared the right food and drinks for people. People were regularly consulted about food choices and changes were made based on their feedback.

We observed people having lunch and found the mealtime experience was relaxed and unrushed. Where people required assistance, this was provided in a dignified way. People remained sat at dining tables with drinks after their meal (out of choice) chatting with each other and staff.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

For example, we saw for people who were at risk of falls, the provider worked with external agencies such as the falls management team to help implement safety measures for the person.

During our inspection we observed staff working with visiting professionals (community nurses). Staff communicated well with them and maintained a record of their visit and outcomes. Staff were able to explain the process for making referrals to other health and social care professionals.

A relative told us how they felt their loved one had access to external resources to meet their needs, they said, “My mum has access to an optician and chiropodist and staff will get her to a dentist if she needs one. Mum is regularly visited by the falls team and the dementia team, and I can’t fault them.”

The provider supported people to manage their health and well-being to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

Staff told us about how they had supported a person to manage their health and well-being. By making the appropriate referral and having the person’s medicines reviewed, the person’s health and well-being had improved significantly, and they were now spending more time in communal areas engaging with other people and staff and in activities.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

For example, for people who required monitoring due to risks associated with their skin integrity needs, records were kept evidencing how this was managed.

The provider held a weekly ‘priority resident review’, which looked at key areas such as mobility, nutrition and skin integrity. This helped to ensure people’s care and most high-risk needs, were monitored and outcomes measured appropriately.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

Staff were observed asking for people’s consent before providing any care and support to people and they gave people time to respond.

People’s care records evidenced people’s capacity to consent had been assessed. Where people lacked capacity, applications for deprivation of liberty safeguards had been applied for appropriately.