During the inspection we spoke with three patients on the in-patient unit, four patients in the day hospice and three people's relatives. We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected.
We used the information to answer the five key questions we always ask;
' Is the service safe?
' Is the service effective?
' Is the service caring?
' Is the service responsive?
' Is the service well led?
This is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what we observed, the records we looked at and what people using the service, their relatives and the staff told us.
Safe
We found the hospice was clean and well maintained. The two four bed bays were large and spacious, decorated to a good standard and well lit by natural light. There was plenty of room around each bed for people to receive visitors. The external doors were large enough to allow beds to be pushed onto the patio so that patients could go outside when the weather permitted. The people we spoke with said they appreciated having space and being able to go outside. We found temperature was well controlled on the in-patient unit and all the rooms occupied by patients had windows which could be opened.
We observed there was good access, space for wheelchairs and ramped corridors.
We looked at a selection of maintenance records relating to fire safety, gas, electricity, water and the lifts and hoists. The records showed the required checks were carried out to make sure the premises and equipment was safe and suitable to meet people's needs.
We observed the day hospice was well-staffed. The staff we spoke with said the service had recently recruited new staff and there sufficient permanent staff employed at the hospice to meet people's needs.
We observed a medication round and saw the nurses verified people's identity before administering medication.
Effective
People receiving care and treatment on the in-patient unit told us they were involved in planning their care. One patient told us they saw the doctor every day and had been told when they could expect to be discharged home. Another patient told us they had asked to be kept fully informed about their care and treatment and were satisfied this was done; they said 'They tell you straight, no trimmings'. They said their spouse was also involved in decisions about their care and treatment. A third patient told us they had seen the doctor very regularly following admission and were aware of what steps had been taken and when they would next be seen.
One relative we spoke with said they had been involved in discussions and decisions about their relatives care and treatment and had been very impressed by the way the palliative care consultant had supported them. However, another relative said they felt there needed to be a more structured approach to communicating with patients' families. They said they had experienced problems with communication and did not feel they fully understood their relatives care and treatment plan.
People told us there was a good choice of food and it was of a good standard. One patient said the hot meals were served hot '9 times out of 10'. The also said staff were very attentive overnight and they were never short of something to drink. Another patient told they felt no compulsion to order from the menu or eat at set times; they said they felt supported but not pressured to eat. They described the food as being to 'home cooked' standard and said they could give it no higher praise. Another patient told us the smoothies served at Overgate were the best they had ever had.
Caring
The patients and relatives said the nursing staff were kind and attentive. One person told us their relative was much brighter following transfer from hospital and attributed this to nurses who had time and quality of food and environment. They said the hospice "exceeds our expectations".
One person who attended the day hospice told us the staff "have got time for you". They said they attended the day hospice weekly and found it a very positive experience, they added, "You can't improve on perfection".
In the four bed bays it was impossible not to overhear some discussions about other patients care and treatment. However, we saw the curtains were routinely drawn around the beds for doctors' consultations. A patient in one of the shared bays said they were aware of two people who had died in the bay and did not find it distressing. They said they would recommend the hospice to anyone and added it was 'a wonderful way to go'.
The Chaplain told us people sometimes spoke to them about deaths occurring in the shared bays. They acknowledged this could sometimes be distressing for people but said there was also a positive aspect to not having death hidden away in side rooms.
Responsive
The Chaplain told us they also worked at the local hospital and was therefore able to offer support to patients in both environments.
One person told us they had been supported by the Chaplain to make arrangements for their funeral. They felt this had helped them to relieve their family of a considerable burden. Other patients told us the Chaplain led informal remembrance services for people who had used the service before their death.
The Chaplains engagement with people who used the service was well illustrated by her involvement in the development of outside 'pod' environments as spaces in which people could be quiet and/or receive counselling.
One patient who attended the day hospice told us there was good co-ordination of care between the hospice and the local hospital. They said this meant they were able to discuss the results of tests carried out in the hospital with the consultant at the hospice.
Well led
At the last inspection in November 2013 we identified some concerns in relation to record keeping. During this inspection we found the service had taken appropriate action to address these concerns. They had made changes to the way patients' records were maintained and the records we looked at were up to date, accurate and fit for purpose. We looked at a number of other records relating to the management of the service and found they were also accurate and up to date.
There were systems in place to give people who used the service the opportunity to share their views. We saw action was taken in response to the feedback people provided. The manager explained they did have an informal process in place for real time patient feedback however the system in use at the time of the inspection also relied on surveys sent to people after they have been discharged. The manager explained they were looking at ways to formalise getting more timely feedback from people so that they could act more quickly to address any areas of concern.
The service had systems in place to review and respond to accidents and incidents. There was evidence of learning from these events which included actions taken to reduce risk.
The service had processes in place for dealing with concerns and/or complaints from people who used the service. At the time of the inspection the provider was updating the complaints procedures and was developing a new information leaflet to explain the process to people who used the service. We saw action was taken in response to people's concerns and/or complaints to reduce the risk of people experiencing similar concerns.
The staff we spoke with said they were listened to and felt well supported by the management team. They said that their opinions are listened to and that since recent recruitment there are now sufficient permanent staff employed at the hospice.