You are here

Heathcotes (Carrington Park) Good


Review carried out on 8 July 2021

During a monthly review of our data

We carried out a review of the data available to us about Heathcotes (Carrington Park) on 8 July 2021. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.

This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.

If you have concerns about Heathcotes (Carrington Park), you can give feedback on this service.

Inspection carried out on 7 March 2019

During a routine inspection

About the service: Heathcotes (Carrington Park) provides accommodation for up to eight people living with complex mental health needs and/or a learning disability. Eight people were living at the service at the time of the inspection. Accommodation is provided over two floors and there is a garden to the front.

People’s experience of using this service:

The service met the characteristics of good in all areas.

People received safe care. There were enough staff to support people. Recruitment checks were completed to ensure staff were suitable to work with people in this environment. People were protected from harm and staff administered their medicines safely. Staff understood people’s risks and had management plans in place. Lessons were learnt when mistakes happened. Staff followed infection control practices to protect people.

The care that people received was effective. 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 received training and support to provide care effectively. People were provided with meals and plentiful drinks to maintain their wellbeing. People were supported by health care professionals to sustain their health.

People enjoyed positive relationships with staff. Staff provided kind, considerate and compassionate care which recognised people’s right to privacy, upheld their dignity and promoted their independence.

People’s care was responsive to their needs. There was a positive approach to providing support which enabled people to fulfil their potential and celebrate their achievements. People were provided with opportunities to socialise and pursue their interests.

The registered manager was approachable and visible to both people and staff. There were arrangements in place to monitor the quality of the home and make improvements when necessary.

More information is in the full report

Rating at last inspection: Good: report published on 22 June 2016.

Why we inspected: This was a scheduled inspection based on previous rating.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Inspection carried out on 25 May 2016

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 25 May 2016 and was announced.

Heathcotes Carrington Park provides accommodation for up to eight people living with mental health needs and or a learning disability. Eight people were living at the service at the time of the inspection.

Heathcotes Carrington is required to have a registered manager. 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. A registered manager was in place.

People told us staff supported them to remain safe. They told us that their possessions were safe and some people said they had no restrictions placed upon them.

Staff were aware of their role and responsibilities in protecting people from abuse and avoidable harm. They had attended appropriate adult safeguarding training and they had available the provider’s safeguarding policy and procedure.

People’s individual needs had been assessed and risk plans were in place where required to advise staff of the action required to reduce known risks from occurring. These were regularly monitored and reviewed. Risks associated to the environment and equipment had also been assessed and safety checks had been completed.

The provider ensured there were sufficient staff employed and deployed appropriately. Safe recruitment checks were in place that ensured as far as possible, people were cared for by suitable staff. People received their medicines as prescribed and these were managed correctly.

Staff received an appropriate induction when they commenced and ongoing training to keep their skills and knowledge up to date. They also received opportunities to review their work and development needs.

The registered manager understood their role and responsibility in ensuring the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards legislation was fully adhered to. Staff were knowledgeable about this legislation and how to protect people’s human rights. Staff involved people as fully as possible in discussions and decisions and gained consent before care and support was provided.

People received sufficient to eat and drink and were supported to maintain a healthy diet. Staff supported people to access both routine and specialist healthcare services. The service involved external health and social care professionals appropriately in meeting people’s individual needs.

People told us that staff were kind, caring and compassionate. Staff supported people to participate activities, interests and hobbies. Staff used effective communication and they understood people needs and what was important to them. People’s privacy, dignity and independence was respected and promoted.

Care records contained information to support staff to meet people’s individual needs. A complaints policy was in place and staff knew how to respond to complaints.

People, their relatives or representatives received opportunities to share their views about the service. Staff felt valued and supported and were positive about the leadership of the service. The provider had checks in place that monitored the quality and safety of the service. These included daily, weekly and monthly audits. In addition the provider had further systems in place that provided robust monitoring of the service.