You are here

Heathcotes (Arnold) Requires improvement

We are carrying out a review of quality at Heathcotes (Arnold). We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 18 December 2019

About the service:

We conducted an unannounced inspection at Heathcotes (Arnold) on 11 November 2019. Heathcotes (Arnold) is a care home and accommodates up to 10 people with a learning disability and or autism and complex mental health needs. The service consisted of one house with a self-contained flat within the house. At the time of our inspection five people were using the service.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

People’s experience of using this service:

Whilst improvements were found in all areas, there was further action required to ensure people received personalised care and support that was responsive to their individual needs. Staff responsible for managing the service, needed to escalate and follow up actions with external health and social professionals in a timely manner.

Improvements in how people’s safety needs were assessed and managed had been made. Risks associated with people’s needs had been reassessed and staff had up to date guidance of the support required to manage and mitigate risks. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s support needs.

Lessons learnt at provider and service level had been made, new systems and processes had been implemented to reduce the level of risk experienced at the service from reoccurring. This included increased oversight by senior managers.

Where safeguarding incidents had occurred, these had been reported and acted upon in line with the local multi agency safeguarding procedures. The use of physical intervention since the last inspection had significantly reduced. Least restrictive practice in the care and support people received had improved. Some people had moved to alternative placements more suitable to their needs, this had a positive impact on people remaining living at the service.

Staffing levels had recently increased to ensure people received the support they required to live active, and inclusive fulfilling lives. National best practice guidance in the prevention and control measures to protect people from the risk of cross contamination were followed.

People received enough to eat and drink. People were involved in menu planning and independence was promoted.

People are 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. People were supported with any health conditions and accessed health services to maintain their health needs.

People were positive about the staff who supported them. Positive engagement was seen between staff and people who used the service, where independence and choice were promoted, encouraged and respected.

People received opportunities to pursue interests and hobbies, including social activities and inclusion. People were involved in discussions and decisions about their care as fully as possible.

Since the last inspection, changes had occurred with the management of the service. At the time of the inspection, a new manager had recently taken responsibility for the service. They were being supported by an experienced regional manager who had very recently been assigned to support the service, but historically was familiar with it. Further time was therefore required for improvements to continue to be made; and those developed, to fully be embedded and sustained. The provider had an ongoing action plan that confirmed what action had been completed to make impro

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 18 December 2019

The service was not always safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 18 December 2019

The service was not always effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 18 December 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Requires improvement

Updated 18 December 2019

The service was not always responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 18 December 2019

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-led findings below.