What the CQC found at Hazeldene House

Care plans and risk assessments gave staff enough information to support people safely. They covered risks such as falls, skin damage, choking and seizures.

“Care plans and risk assessments were clear, comprehensive and up to date.” from the report

Staff knew people's preferences and supported their dignity, choices and independence. Relatives said they were kept informed about changes in care.

“People were involved in decisions about their care and they received care which promoted their dignity and encouraged independence.” from the report

People were offered choices and their dietary needs and intolerances were catered for. Healthcare professionals were involved when needed, and oral health plans were in place.

“People enjoyed the food and their dietary needs and preferences were met, for example food intolerances such as lactose.” from the report

The home had improved since the previous inspection. It was no longer in breach of the regulations previously identified, and audits were being completed regularly.

“At this inspection enough improvement had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulation 12.” from the report

Complaints were investigated and outcomes were shared. The provider used mistakes and concerns to make changes and reduce the chance of similar problems happening again.

“Where there had been mistakes lessons had been learned from the concern and shared with staff so the risk of similar concerns arising could be minimised.” from the report

Instructions for some as-needed medicines were not clear. Records did not always show whether the medicine had the intended effect, although immediate measures were put in place during the inspection.

“Where medicines were prescribed 'as required' such as painkillers or medicines for anxiety, instructions were not clear, and records not always completed.” from the report

The manager had left shortly before the inspection and there was no registered manager in post. A new manager had been appointed but had not yet started.

“The service did not have a registered manager at the time of our inspection; the manager had left the service within the previous few weeks.” from the report

The deputy manager spoke to staff informally each day, but structured group meetings had not been held. The provider said these would restart when the new manager joined.

“The deputy manager did not have structured meetings with groups of staff, although they spoke to all staff daily informally during the walk around of the service.” from the report

Some relatives felt activities were limited and wanted more to occupy people's minds. The provider said activities were being reviewed.

“Some relatives told us the range of activities was limited and they would like to see more offered to people.” from the report

Some relatives who had signed tenancy agreements had not been fully told about alternative accommodation or care options. Inspectors found no evidence of harm, but were unsure whether people had been offered real choices.

“However, not all relatives who had signed tenancies had been made fully aware of alternative options, either for the provision of accommodation or their care.” from the report