CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Hartley Park Care Home
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm, and medicines, staffing and infection control were generally managed safely. Inspectors found that thickening products were not always used as prescribed, although action was already under way.
- Effective?
- Good
- People generally received effective care, with staff training, health support and nutrition planning based on good practice. Inspectors observed that some people waited a long time for meals.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- Staff showed exceptional kindness, compassion, dignity and respect. People and relatives described staff as wonderfully kind, and inspectors saw warm, genuine relationships.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Care and activities were highly personalised. Staff learned about people's histories, interests, communication needs and wishes, and worked hard to prevent social isolation.
- Well-led?
- Outstanding
- Leadership was described as exceptional, open and focused on continuous improvement. People, relatives and staff were involved in decisions, and the management team had strong oversight of the home.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Rated Outstanding; inspectors found exceptionally caring, responsive and well-led care, with some medicines, mealtime and record-keeping issues to check.
This was an unannounced inspection over 2, 3 and 9 October 2019. Inspectors observed care, spoke with people, relatives and staff, checked 17 care plans, medicines records, training records and quality checks, and contacted health professionals after the visits.
The home was rated Outstanding overall. Caring, Responsive and Well-led were Outstanding. Safe and Effective were Good. Inspectors found a strong person-centred culture, kind staff, personalised activities, good links with health professionals and an open approach to learning and improvement.
The report also recorded some areas needing attention. Thickening products were not always used as prescribed, some people waited a long time for meals, and the home had identified that some risk assessments and health care records needed updating. The overall rating was unchanged from the previous Outstanding rating, published in April 2017.
Kind and compassionate staff
Inspectors found staff who knew people well and gave emotional as well as practical support. People and relatives consistently spoke positively about their kindness.
“People were supported by staff who truly cared about them and went the extra mile to make sure they felt loved and were happy.” from the report
Personalised activities
The home took time to understand people's past interests and arranged activities and outings around them. This included community links and support for important family occasions.
“The service had continued to go the extra mile to find out what people had done in the past and evaluated whether it could accommodate activities in line with their previous employment, interests and hobbies.” from the report
People involved in decisions
People and their representatives were regularly asked about care and the running of the home. People could also help with staff recruitment and choices about the environment.
“People and their representatives were regularly asked for their views about their care plans and the delivery of their service, and had their wishes respected.” from the report
Strong leadership and improvement
Inspectors found highly skilled leadership, motivated staff and good systems for learning from incidents, feedback and research.
“The registered manager and provider were highly passionate about continuous development and improvement.” from the report
Thickening products
needs fixingSome supplements used to change the consistency of drinks were not always used as prescribed. The manager had started action to improve this.
“We found that the use and storage of supplements which altered the consistency of people's drinks (thickening products) was not always being used as prescribed.” from the report
Long waits at mealtimes
needs fixingInspectors saw that some people waited for long periods for their meals. Staff had already recognised this and said they wanted to improve the mealtime experience.
“The dining experience was observed to not always be a respectful experience, with some people waiting long periods of time for their meals.” from the report
Records needing updates
minorThe manager had identified that some risk assessments could be updated and refer more clearly to best practice. Action was already under way to improve some health care records.
“The registered manager had already recognised through their own clinical governance meetings that risk assessments could benefit from updating and referencing best practice.” from the report
- 01What has changed to make sure thickening products are stored and used exactly as prescribed?
- 02How have you reduced waiting times at mealtimes, and how do you check that people have a respectful dining experience?
- 03Which risk assessments and health care records needed updating, and has that work now been completed?
- 04How are staffing numbers decided during mornings and nights, and what happens if people's needs increase?
- 05How do you review restrictions such as the code locks on access to the garden?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and both the care and the premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 November 2019 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, April 2017
Rated Outstanding; inspectors found exceptionally caring, responsive and well-led care, with some improvements still needed to induction and mealtimes.
Inspectors visited on 22 and 23 February 2017. The first day was unannounced. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals, observed care and mealtimes, and checked care records, medicines, audits and other documents.
The home was rated Outstanding overall. Caring, Responsive and Well-led were rated Outstanding. Safe and Effective were rated Good. Inspectors found kind and personalised care, meaningful activities, strong leadership, safe staffing and good support for people's health and nutrition.
There were two areas to keep under review. The home was improving its induction for new staff because some staff did not feel the three-day induction gave them enough support. The special Chinese meal observed during the inspection was less organised than usual, and some people waited 15 minutes before being offered a drink.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives consistently felt listened to, valued and safe. Staff built trusting relationships and showed compassion in everyday care.
“People and relatives consistently told us they felt cared for, valued, and listened to and that their views mattered.” from the report
Personalised end of life care
Staff respected people's wishes and supported relatives with tenderness before and after a death. Care was planned around personal, cultural and religious preferences.
“People's end of life care was personalised, dignified and pain free.” from the report
Meaningful activities
The home offered group and one-to-one activities, outings and opportunities linked to people's hobbies and abilities. Inspectors found these helped reduce social isolation.
“Activities were creative, varied, abundant and very much enjoyed by people.” from the report
Strong leadership
The management team had clear values and responsibilities. Staff were motivated, and feedback and audits were used to improve care.
“The leadership team promoted strong values and a person centred culture.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, safe recruitment checks and accurate medicines records. Staff were visible and interactions were unhurried.
“Staff, people and relatives told us there were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to keep people safe.” from the report
Induction for new staff
needs fixingSome new staff felt the three-day induction did not give them enough support. The manager said the induction would be reviewed and new staff would be asked whether they needed more time before working alone.
“They told us they felt the three day induction had not met their needs.” from the report
One less organised mealtime
needs fixingThe special Chinese meal observed by inspectors was not as organised as usual. Some people waited 15 minutes before being offered a drink, although staff encouraged people to eat and the manager agreed the meal was unusual.
“We found people were aware it was lunchtime and ready at the table however, some people waited for 15 minutes before being offered a drink” from the report
- 01How long is the induction for new staff now, and how do you decide when a new member of staff is ready to work alone?
- 02How do you make sure people are offered drinks promptly during busy or unusual mealtimes?
- 03How are people's changing health needs and risks reflected in their care plans and risk assessments?
- 04Which activities and one-to-one opportunities would be suitable for my relative's interests and abilities?
- 05How will you keep me informed about changes in my relative's health, falls or visits from health professionals?
This inspection assessed all five CQC questions and gave an overall rating; the first day was unannounced. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 April 2017 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk. The report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
Every inspection of Hartley Park Care Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Outstanding rating throughout.
- November 2019Outstandingcurrent ratingstayed OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- April 2017Outstandingstayed OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- February 2015OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: OutstandingCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 December 2012.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Plymouth
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
8 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.