• Care Home
  • Care home

The Heathers Residential Care Home

Overall: Good

35 Farnaby Road, Bromley, Kent, BR1 4BL (020) 8460 6555

Provided and run by:
The Heathers Residential Care Home Limited

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 1 December 2020

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are conducting a thematic review of infection control and prevention measures in care homes.

The service was selected to take part in this thematic review which is seeking to identify examples of good practice in infection prevention and control.

This inspection took place on 9 November 2020 and was announced.

Overall inspection


Updated 1 December 2020

This inspection took place on 12 April 2018 and was unannounced. The Heathers Residential Care Home is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing, or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The Heathers Residential Care Home accommodates up to 14 people. There were 10 people living at the home at the time of our inspection.

The home did not have a registered manager in post. 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. The current manager had applied to become the registered manager of the service.

At our last comprehensive inspection of the service in March 2017 we found improvement was required because staff were not always up to date with refresher training in areas considered mandatory by the provider and because people’s care plans had not always been reviewed on a regular basis to ensure they remained up to date. At this inspection we found that the provider had acted to address these issues. However, we found further improvement was required because the provider’s systems for monitoring the safety and quality of the service failed to identify to consistently identify issues or drive service improvements in areas including the use of risk assessment tools and monitoring people’s Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisations.

People were protected from the risk of abuse because staff were aware of the types of abuse that could occur and the action to take if they suspected abuse. Risks to people had been assessed and action taken to manage identified risks safely. There were sufficient staff deployed to safely meet people’s needs and the provider followed safe recruitment practices.

Staff were aware of the action to take to reduce the risk of infection. People’s medicines were received, stored, administered and disposed of safely and accurate records were maintained relating to medicines administration. Staff were aware of report and record any accidents and incidents and the manager reviewed accident and incident records to ensure sufficient action had been taken to reduce the risk of repeat occurrence.

People’s needs were assessed and their care was planned in line with nationally recognised guidance. 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 an induction when they started work at the service and were supported in their roles through regular training and supervision.

People told us staff sought their consent when offering them support and involved them in making decisions about their care and treatment. People also told us they enjoyed the meals on offer at the service and were supported to maintain a balanced diet. Staff treated people with dignity and respected their privacy. People confirmed that staff were kind and caring in their approach when offering them support.

People had access to a range of healthcare services when required and the service worked in partnership with other agencies to help ensure people received co-ordinated care and support. People were supported to maintain the relationships that were important to them and spoke positively about the range of activities on offer at the service. The provider had a complaints procedure in place and people confirmed they knew how to raise a complaint.

The provider had systems in place for seeking feedback from people about the service they received through one to one discussion, residents meetings and an annual survey. People spoke positively about the manager and the management of the service. Staff were aware of the responsibilities of their roles and told us they worked well as a team and received good support from the manager. The manager held regular staff meetings to discuss service developments.