The inspection of Old Hastings House took place on 10 and 14 November 2016 and was unannounced. There are 59 people currently living at Old Hastings House.

Old Hastings House provides accommodation for up to 60 older people that require support and personal care and for those who live with dementia. The service is divided into two units. The residential suite is for up to 45 people who require support with personal care and the Magdalen suite is for up to 15 people who live with a dementia type illness. The home has a range of pleasant communal areas throughout the buildings. The service is owned by The Magdalen And Lasher Charity and is located in Hastings, East Sussex.

There was a registered manager at the home. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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.

Throughout our inspection, people spoke positively about the home. Comments included, “All the staff are really pleasant” and, “I am very happy here.”

Not everyone could tell us of their experiences, but those that could spoke highly of the home and commented they felt safe. Our own observations and the records we looked at reflected the positive comments people made. People had confidence in the staff to support them and we observed positive interactions throughout our inspection.

Care plans and risk assessments included people’s assessed level of care needs, action for staff to follow and an outcome to be achieved. Medicines were managed safely in accordance with current regulations and guidance. There were systems in place to ensure that medicines had been stored, administered, audited and reviewed appropriately, including the administration of controlled drugs.

People were happy and relaxed with staff. They said they felt safe and there were sufficient staff to support them. One person told us, “I feel safe here. It’s nice here.” When staff were recruited, their employment history was checked and references obtained. Checks were also undertaken to ensure new staff were safe to work within the care sector. Staff were knowledgeable and trained in safeguarding and what action they should take if they suspected abuse was taking place. Retention of staff was extremely high and most staff we spoke with had worked at Old Hastings House for many years.

Accidents and incidents were recorded appropriately and steps taken by the home to minimise the risk of similar events happening in the future. Risks associated with the environment and equipment had been identified and managed. Emergency procedures were in place in the event of fire and people knew what to do, as did the staff.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. We found that the manager understood when an application should be made and how to submit one. Where people lacked the mental capacity to make decisions the home was guided by the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) to ensure any decisions were made in the person’s best interests.

Staff had received essential training and there were opportunities for additional training specific to the needs of the service, such as diabetes and advanced dementia. Staff had received both one to one and group supervision meetings with their manager, and formal personal development plans, such as annual appraisals were in place.

People were encouraged and supported to eat and drink well. One person said, “I like the food, its nice food.” There was a varied daily choice of meals and people were able to give feedback and have choice in what they ate and drank. People were advised on healthy eating and special dietary requirements were met. People’s weight was monitored, with

A single adult social care inspector carried out this inspection. The focus of the inspection was to answer five key questions; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service, their relatives and the staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at. If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

People had been cared for in an environment that was safe, clean and hygienic. Equipment at the home had been well maintained and serviced regularly. There were enough staff on duty with the appropriate skills and experience to meet the needs of the people living at the home. There were arrangements for senior staff including the manager to be on call out of hours. This was to provide support for staff in case of emergencies.

Is the service effective?

People told us that they were happy with the care they received and felt their needs had been met. It was clear from what we saw and from speaking with staff that they understood people’s care and support needs and that they knew them well. One person told us "The staff help me with being more independent”. Staff had received training to meet the needs of the people living at the home.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that care workers were patient and gave encouragement when supporting people. People told us they were able to do things at their own pace and were not rushed. Our observations confirmed this. One person told us “The staff are more like my friends". Another person told us "The staff look after me so well here”.

Is the service responsive?

People’s needs had been assessed before they moved into the home. People told us that staff discussed any changes to do with their care with them regularly, and that staff were approachable if there were any issues of concern. Records confirmed people’s preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided that met their wishes. People had access to activities that were important to them and had been supported to maintain relationships with their friends and relatives. One person told us “The staff cared for me well during a recent medical emergency, staying with me and reassuring me throughout”.

Is the service well-led?

Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and quality assurance processes were in place. People told us they were asked for their feedback on the service they received and that they had also filled in a quality survey. They confirmed they had been listened to and as a result of the survey, changes had been made to the way their food was presented and delivered. Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. They said the management had consulted with them before implementing changes to the management of the home and their views had been taken into consideration.

People we spoke with told us that the staff were helpful and looked after them well. They liked the food and told us that their choices were included in the menus. One person said, “We have meetings to talk about food.”

We found that staff understood people’s needs and discussed their care plans and activities with them. Staff told us that they enjoyed working in the home and felt supported.

The buildings and grounds were generally well maintained with a suitable design and layout.

People told us that the staff listened to them. People also said that staff cared and supported them kindly and with respect. We were told that people's independence was encouraged and that they enjoyed the outings provided for them.

People and relatives said they understood the care plans and were involved in their development.

Staff we spoke with felt supported by the management, well trained and able to develop themselves further.

Some people we spoke with said that they had completed questionnaires about the service provided. People and their relatives felt able to approach staff and managers regarding their care and treatment.