Hatton Grove

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 good. At this inspection the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this. People’s needs and choices had been assessed. The assessments involved them and their representatives and followed best practice guidance. Care plans had been developed to reflect these assessments. People’s care needs had been reviewed. The staff worked in partnership with other professionals to provide evidence-based care and monitor people’s health and wellbeing. The provider understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and obtained consent for people’s care and treatment. We did not assess all the quality statements within this key question. We did not identify concerns relating to these areas which we judged as being met at our last inspection.

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 staff had assessed people’s needs and created care plans to reflect these assessments. They knew people well and were familiar with their needs. People’s relatives told us they were consulted about assessments and reviews. The provider used assessments which reflected best practice and involved other professionals when needed, for example therapists and healthcare professionals.

The staff delivered evidence-based care which reflected best practice. They had undertaken training about supporting people with a learning disability and demonstrated a good understanding and knowledge of guidance and legislation. We observed staff supporting people in a person-centred way. People’s nutritional needs had been assessed, planned for and met. People’s nutritional intake was monitored, and the staff consulted other experts for advice and guidance when needed. For example, dietitians and speech and language therapists. They recommendations were incorporated into care plans. Some people required specialist equipment. The staff had consulted and had training from professionals around this. The manager explained that they had arranged recent specialist training and a workshop for all staff following changes in 1 person’s equipment needs. Staff told us this had been useful and helped them to discuss any concerns they had. People’s relatives told us they were happy with the way staff supported people and monitored their wellbeing.

The staff worked closely with other professionals. For example, they made timely referrals for additional healthcare support when needed. The service was supported by a Community Matron who contacted and visited the home on a regular basis. They told us the communication with the staff was very good and that they alerted them to any concerns. The manager explained they accessed a range of different professionals to offer support and guidance when needed. They also worked closely with local training providers, other care home staff and managers and the local authority quality assurance team to help make sure staff followed best practice and had the information they needed. The staff communicated well with each other. There were regular handovers of information and meetings as well as systems for sharing written communication. The staff told us they felt well informed.

People were offered choices and supported to consent when they were able to. The staff knew them well and understood how to present information to enable each person to make a choice. We observed staff being patient, obtaining consent when possible and explaining what they were doing to people. Some relatives explained they held legal authority to make decisions in people’s best interests. They told us they were consulted and involved in decision making. For example, the manager had recently consulted relatives about seasonal vaccinations, and they were asked to help make decisions in people’s best interests and consent when they had the legal authority to do so. The staff had undertaken training about the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and had a good understanding of this and how to apply their knowledge.