Hengist Field Care Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

The service continues to support people safely. Potential risks to people’s health and welfare had been assessed and there was detailed guidance for staff to follow. People were supported to take positive risks and remain as independent as possible. There continued to be a learning culture within the service following incidents or accidents to reduce the risk of them happening again. There was enough staff to meet people’s needs. Staff followed infection control guidance, and the service was clean and odour free. Medicines were managed safely, and people received their medicines as prescribed. Staff understood their role in recognising and reporting abuse and discrimination to keep people safe.

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.

People told us they felt safe living at the service. One person told us, "I feel very safe, there are always staff around if I need them” and "Generally but I am a worrier I worry about if there was a fire how would I get out, but I do know I would be safe as staff have reassured me."

Staff told us they reported incidents and accidents and when things went wrong. The registered manager described how they reviewed the incidents and discussed with staff what measures to put in place to ensure learning from them. They also told us, incidents were discussed with staff during handovers to make sure they were aware of changes as quickly as possible.

There were effective systems in place to report incidents and when things went wrong. Senior care staff reviewed care plans and risks assessments and updated them when people's needs changed.

People told us staff knew them well, were supportive and made sure their preferences were met. People told us, "The staff have got to know me very well since I have been here,” and "They know I like to do as much as I can for myself and are very supportive.” Others told us, “On the whole they look after me very well and I am happy here,” and ”I have had the best support from the staff they get it right every time.”

Staff described how they assessed people's needs before agreeing to them moving into the service. Staff met with people and their relatives to discuss their needs and what they expected from the service. Staff told us they involved professionals to gather their feedback and those involved in the person’s care to understand the person’s needs and plan their care effectively.

We requested feedback from healthcare professionals but did not receive any comments from them.

There were systems and processes in place to ensure safe and effective transition of people to the service. The provider gave people ‘Welcome Packs’ when they first moved into the service. The welcome pack was written in an accessible format and contained information about the service including menus, times of activities, service user guide and basic toiletries to help them settle initially in the service. The provider had a ‘Hospital transfer form’ which contained people’s care needs, allergies, body map, likes and dislikes, risks and medications. This was shared with services when people moved to another service or went into hospital.

People told us, staff kept them safe, one person commented, ”I feel very safe there are always staff around if I need them,” and another person told us, ”Yes, I can wander around using my walking frame knowing there are staff around to help me.”

Staff knew their responsibilities to safeguard people from abuse. Staff had completed safeguarding training. They knew signs and how to recognise abuse and how to report it. Staff explained their role in raising their concerns with the local authorities if needed to safeguard people from abuse. The management team knew their responsibilities and described how they worked to ensure people were safe in the service.

We observed staff supporting people to move around the service safely. People appeared confident to accept assistance from staff and requested support when they felt unsure or wanted confirmation they were safe.

There were processes in place to safeguard people from abuse. We reviewed the provider’s safeguarding policy and procedure. When safeguarding concerns were raised about the service, the management team had investigated each concern. They cooperated with external agencies such as the local authority to investigate and address the concerns.

People told us, they were encouraged to do as much as they could for themselves. Comments included, "I make sure I do as much as I can for myself, But the staff are here to assist if I need them." People told us staff supported them to be active, they said, "Yes they let me do what I can for myself and encourage me to be active”

Staff described how people and their relatives were involved in managing risk. Staff involved relatives during pre-assessment meetings to help ascertain risks. Staff used information gathered to devise care plans and risk management plans. Review meetings were held with people and their relatives where possible. Staff communicated and updated people's relatives of any changes in people's circumstances.

We observed staff encouraging people to be as independent as possible and to use equipment such as walking frames to reduce the risk of falls.

There were processes in place to assess risks people faced. Risks to people were assessed during the pre-assessment meeting. Then on an ongoing basis when they moved in the home, reviews were held when things changed or following an incident.

People told us, they were able to move around the service safely, there was enough room for their walking aids and communal areas were kept clear of obstruction.

Staff had completed training in health and safety. The provider had a maintenance team who checked that the health and safety of the home was maintained.

We observed the service appeared clean and tidy and people had their own personal items around them, including pictures and ornaments. Fire exits were clearly marked with ways signage and well maintained and free from obstruction. Areas where chemicals were stored such as, the laundry, sluice rooms and cleaning cupboard were locked. The environment was well lit with electric and natural light, well-ventilated and at a comfortable temperate, radiators were on, covered and clean. The state of repair, indoors and outdoors, was of a good standard. All communal areas had lots of space for wheelchairs to pass by; dining rooms had high back comfortable chairs with plenty of space around them to move a wheelchair or walk with a frame.

There were systems in place to check the safety of the environment, fire safety, gas safety, electrical, and equipment checks were carried out and they were safe.

People told us they thought there were enough staff and they came to assist them when needed. People told told us, "It is fine all good, I have a button on my table, and I press it and they come”, and "Don’t use it very often but they do come quick when I have needed them.”

Staff told us, there were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people's needs. They felt supported in their roles through effective supervisions and appraisals.

People’s calls for assistance were responded to promptly. We observed that people received the support they needed, there were enough staff to support people during lunch time.

The provider used a dependency tool to determine the number of staff required to safely meet people’s needs. The duty rota we reviewed showed the staff numbers reflected the numbers recommended by the dependency tool. Staff were recruited safely. Checks were completed to make sure staff were of good character and had the appropriate qualifications for the role. For example, nurse registrations were checked to make sure they were registered with the Nursing and Midwifery Council.

People told us, staff kept their rooms and the service clean and tidy. Comments included, "The staff are very good at keeping it clean and tidy” and ” Yes its kept very clean.”

Staff told us, they had been trained in infection control procedures and they followed good hygiene. They knew their responsibilities to maintain good hygiene and reduce the risk of infection.

We observed staff following best infection control practice in the way staff washed their hands, wore personal protective equipment and managed the cleanliness of the environment including the safe disposal of clinical waste. There was no shared equipment between people; their personal belongings and equipment were tagged to their room. Everyone who required hoisting had 2 slings, one being cleaned when the other in use.

There were systems and processes in place to control and prevent the risk of infection. Staff received regular training, and their competency assessed. There were infection prevention and control procedures and risk assessments in place. Regular Infection prevention and control audits were completed. There were systems in place for the storage and disposal of waste.

People told us, they thought their medicines were managed well. Comments included, “Yes absolutely they organise everything for me ” and, “I think so. They give me what I am prescribed from the GP."

Nurses administered medicines and they told us they had enough time to support people to take their medicines. Nurses understood their responsibility to manage people's medicines safely.

There were systems and processes in place to ensure the safe management of medicines. There was a medicine management procedure in place. We saw good practice guidelines for staff to learn from. Medicines were stored correctly and there were protocols in place for staff to follow when people were prescribed when required medicines including pain relief.