About the service:

Hallamshire Residential Home is a converted Victorian house situated in the Broomhill area of Sheffield. Communal lounges and dining areas are based on the ground floor, and accommodation is split across the ground and first floor. It provides care and accommodation for up to 32 older people. At the time of our inspection 31 people were using the service, some of whom were living with a dementia.

People’s experience of using this service:

People who used the service and their relatives were positive about the care they received at Hallamshire Residential Home. Their comments included, “Staff make us feel welcome when we visit. They always give us an update on [relatives name]. They tell us if they’re eating well and if they’ve seen the doctor. They always let us know,” and “We would recommend this home. We looked around a few but this was by far the best and we haven’t been disappointed.”

People were safe because there were effective risk assessments in place, and systems to keep people safe from abuse or avoidable harm. Also, medicines were managed safely and people were supported to ensure their health needs were met.

Observations and discussions with relatives and staff indicated there were enough staff on duty. The service used regular agency staff to fill any gaps in the rota to make sure people’s needs were met in a timely manner.

The registered provider had taken prompt and appropriate action to learn lessons when things went wrong. This included procuring external consultants to carry out audits of the home and make suggestions for improvements.

Since the last inspection, refurbishment and redecoration work had been completed which had improved the appearance of the home. The environment was clean, bright and homely.

Staff had undertaken a good range of training, and this was refreshed regularly. Staff also received supervision and an annual appraisal. Staff told us they could speak with the managers at any time and they would listen to them and give advice.

People, and those who were important to them, were at the heart of the service and were encouraged to be involved in decisions and developing their support.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff recognised the importance of promoting equality and diversity. Staff also maintained people’s privacy and dignity when providing personal care and support.

We spent time observing staff interacting with people and found they were kind, caring and supported people in a sensitive way. Staff were very patient and gave people time and opportunities to remain independent.

Each person had a care plan. However, not all care plans had been reviewed and updated to reflect the current needs of people who used the service. Information seen in care plans was sometimes conflicting which made it difficult to ensure people’s individual needs and wishes were being maintained.

There was an extensive activity programme available to people, which they all thoroughly enjoyed and participated in.

There was a complaints procedure and we saw a system was in place to log any complaints received. People who used the service knew how to make a complaint.

The registered manager provided staff with leadership and was approachable. Audits and checks continued to be used to drive improvements to the service people received.

People’s feedback was used to make changes to the service, for example, to the menus and activities.

Rating at last inspection: Good (report published on 1 November 2016).

Why we inspected: This was a planned comprehensive inspection based on the rating awarded at the last inspection.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor the service to ensure that people receive safe, compassionate, high quality care. Further inspections will be planned for future dates. For more details,

This inspection took place on 23 August 2016 and was unannounced. This meant the registered provider and staff did not know we would be visiting. A second day of inspection took place on 24 August 2016, and was announced. The service was last inspected in November 2013 and was meeting the regulations we inspected at that time.

Hallamshire Residential Home is based in a converted Victorian house situated in the Broomhill area of Sheffield. Communal lounges and dining areas are based on the ground floor, and accommodation is split across the ground and first floor. It provides care and accommodation for up to 32 older people. At the time of our inspection 29 people were using the service, most of whom were living with a dementia.

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.

People’s medicines were managed safely but we made a recommendation about recording their use. People said they felt safe at the service.

Risks to people using the service were assessed and plans put in place to reduce the risk of them occurring. Risks to people from premises and equipment were also assessed and reviewed. Accidents and incidents were recorded and investigated to see if improvements were needed to keep people safe.

Plans were in place to ensure people received the support they needed in emergency situations. Policies and procedures were in place to help protect people from abuse. Staff had access to a safeguarding policy. The registered manager monitored staffing levels to ensure they were sufficient to keep people safe. Recruitment procedures minimised the risk of unsuitable staff being employed.

Staff said they received all the training they needed to support people effectively. Staff also received additional, specialist training if a person using the service had a particular support need. Staff were supported through regular supervisions and appraisals.

The service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and staff had a good working knowledge of it. People were supported to maintain a healthy diet. People and their relatives spoke positively about the food at the service.

People were supported to access external professionals to maintain and improve their health. Care plans contained records of visits from GPs, district nurses, speech and language therapists, physiotherapists and other professionals.

People and their relatives spoke positively about the care they received, describing it as kind and caring. Throughout the inspection we saw numerous examples of kind and friendly interactions between people and staff, with staff acting professionally at all times.

Staff clearly knew people very well and were able to talk with them about their relatives, their lives and other things they enjoyed. We saw numerous examples of staff talking with people about what their relatives were up to, which people clearly enjoyed. As we were moving around the building staff took time to introduce us to people and tell us what was important to them.

People told us they had the freedom to make their own choices about the care and support they received. Staff treated people with dignity and respect.

At the time of our inspection no one was using an advocate or receiving end of life care. Procedures were in place to support people to access these if needed.

People received person-centred care. Care plans were on a monthly basis to ensure they reflected people’s current support needs and preferences.

People were supported to access activities they enjoyed. The service placed a strong emphasis on providing personalised activities. People and their relatives spoke very positively about

People’s views and experiences were taken into account when providing the service. We were informed by relatives and people who lived at the service, that staff discussed the care and support options available at the service.

Some people remembered sharing their life story with staff. One person said, “I remember my family asking me and writing what I used to do and where I worked. I think they gave it to the manager.”

Care was planned and managed by staff with the help of people and their families. People said they were included in care reviews. They said they were informed of the reason for any changes to their care. One person said they had become unsteady on their feet and they had been asked to use a frame to give them support. Dedicated members of staff were seen carrying out cleaning duties throughout the home during our inspection. The communal areas, the bathrooms and some of the bedrooms we saw were clean and smelt fresh.

Staff received appropriate professional development, so that people who used the service received care, treatment and support from staff that were competent to carry out their roles. Staff said they received ‘a lot’ of training and updates.

People who used the service and their representatives were asked for their views about the care and treatment and they were acted on by the provider. We saw minutes of resident’s meetings. These happened every month. There was a newsletter for people to find out what happens at the home.

On the day of our inspection we observed and chatted to people in the communal areas. People who were able to hold a meaningful conversation said their experience of care, treatment and support was good. Their comments confirmed their needs were met and their rights were protected by staff.

One person said, “I can’t tell you for sure whether I was involved in the planning of my care, but I know my family is involved.” Another person said, “I can go to bed and get up when I want. I would rather be at home but that is no reflection on this home or the staff.” The others looked contented, friendly and freely moved around the home.

Before people received any care or treatment they had been asked for their consent. The information we gathered on the day confirmed that the provider had acted in accordance with individual’s wishes. Staff had a good understanding of people’s capacity and their preferences.

We gained the views of health professionals who visited the service on the day. They said staff were always receptive to suggestions and people received good care at the home.

There was an effective recruitment process in place. Staff described the process they followed when they were recruited to work at the home. They said they liked the work and the team they worked with. One staff member said, “I love the residents. I find out what type of life they led before they came in and what they enjoy doing. It helps us when we chat to them and understand them better.”

People who used the service told us they were happy with the care provided and were involved in decisions about their care and welfare needs. One person told us they were able to choose what time they got up and went to bed and if they wanted to join in the activities. Three people told us they had not read their care plan but that was their choice.

We spoke with two relatives during our inspection who told us they had not been involved in the development of their relatives care plan, but this had been their choice. However, they also told us they were able to make changes and contribute to their relative’s care if they wished. They also told us their relative’s dignity was respected and confidentiality was always maintained.

People who used the service told us they were happy living at the home and they were well looked after. One person told us “I enjoy living here”. Another person told us “It is quite alright”. Staff were described as good, helpful and nice.

One relative we spoke with told us they were happy with the care and their family member was well looked after.

We spoke with two relatives who confirmed they would talk to the manager if they had any concerns. One relative told us “My relative feels safe here”. People told us that they felt safe at the home and they would tell staff or the manager if they were worried about anything.