Honeysuckle House

Updated 11 January 2023

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

We received information of concern about visiting arrangements at this service. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection prevention and control measures the provider had in place. We also asked the provider about any staffing pressures the service was experiencing and whether this was having an impact on the service.

This inspection took place on 21 December 2022 and was unannounced.

Updated 11 January 2023

Honeysuckle House is registered to provide 24 hour care and accommodate to twenty-five older people. The home specialises in providing care for people who have dementia. It is situated in close proximity of Blackpool promenade and local facilities such as shops, tram routes and other community facilities. The home has two lounges and a large dining area. Bedrooms are located on the ground and upper floors. There is a small parking area for visitors at the front of the building. At the time of our inspection visit there were 21 people who lived at the home.

At the last inspection carried out on 17 May 2016 the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good. There was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

There was a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Although a number of people had limited verbal communication and were unable to converse with us, we were able to speak with one person who lived at the home. They told us they were happy and supported by staff who cared for them and treated them well. We also spoke with a visiting relative who told us they loved visiting the home and found staff really friendly and welcoming. The person said, “[Relative] receives excellent care.”

Throughout the inspection we observed staff being kind and attentive to people in their care. We saw they were caring, patient and engaged people in conversation whilst providing their support.

We saw staff were always in attendance in communal areas and available when people needed their help.

Procedures were in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take necessary action as required. Staff had received safeguarding training and understood their responsibilities to report unsafe care or abusive practices.

Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. These had been kept under review and were relevant to the care provided.

Staff had been recruited safely, appropriately trained and supported. They had skills, knowledge and experience required to support people with their care and social needs.

The service had sufficient staffing levels in place to provide support people required. We saw staff showed concern for people’s wellbeing and responded quickly when people required their help. Staff spoken with told us they were able to spend time with people in their care meeting their social needs.

Staff responsible for assisting people with their medicines had received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required. Medication practices observed protected people from unsafe management of their medicines. People received their medicines as prescribed and when needed and appropriate records had been completed.

People’s care and support had been planned with them and was person centred. Care plans were organised and had identified care and support people required. We found they were informative about care people had received. We saw people had consented to their care and treatment and where appropriate family members who had the legal authority to do so.

We looked around the building and found it had been maintained, was clean and hygienic and a safe place for people to live. We found equipment had been serviced and maintained as required. The design of the building and facilities provided were appropriate for the care and support provided.

The service had safe infection control procedures in place and staff had received infection control training.

Meal times were relaxed and organised around people’s individual daily routines. People who required help to eat their meals were supported by caring, attentive and patient staff.

People were supported to have access to healthcare professionals and their healthcare needs had been met.

We observed staff were caring and attentive towards people in their care. Staff we spoke with understood the importance of high standards of care to give people meaningful lives.

The service had information about support from an external advocate should this be required by people they supported.

The service had a complaints procedure which was on display in the entrance hall for the attention of people who lived at the home and their visitors. A visiting relative told us they were aware of the procedure but had never had reason to make a complaint.

The service used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included regular audits and satisfaction surveys to seek their views about the service provided.

Further information is in the detailed findings below