Heathlands Residential Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 67 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider assessed and reviewed people’s health, care, wellbeing and communication needs. However, it was not clear from records that care plans were shown and discussed with people or relatives. 

Some people we spoke with told us they felt staff knew them well. Staff told us they accessed electronic care records to review guidance of how to meet people’s individual needs. One staff member told us, “Care plans are updated as frequently as needed and there is always a resident of the day which a team leader will focus on and ensure everything relating to their care plan is up to date and correct.”

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards. Staff used nationally recognised tools to assess and monitor people’s needs and risks. Dietary notification forms were completed and shared with the catering team to ensure people received the appropriate diet.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services. Staff worked collaboratively with healthcare professionals to meet people’s needs. For example, regular meetings were held to share information about people’s care and treatment. We spoke with healthcare professionals who told us staff followed their advice and were proactive in making new referrals when required.

People told us they had access to health care professional such as GP and nurse practitioners. Staff ensured people received other health checks such as dental, and hearing checks. Where people were experiencing weight loss; this was regularly monitored. We found improvements could be made in recording what people ate where monitoring was required. Some entries on records did not accurately record the amount of food offered and eaten, or where meals had been refused if alternatives had been offered. This meant staff may not be able to be effectively evaluate or gain an accurate picture of what people had eaten. Health care professionals told us staff contacted them in a timely manner to raise any concerns about people’s health.

Systems were in place to monitor people’s health; however, these were not always used effectively to record people’s care or monitor outcomes. For example, where people were at risk of constipation, staff did not always follow instructions detailed in people’s care plans. This increased the risk of people suffering poor bowel health. The provider had identified improvements in recording was needed and was addressing this.

 

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

There were comprehensive care plans about people's ability to consent. Where best interest decisions had been made on behalf of people, records were detailed. However, some restrictions which had been implemented had not all been assessed. For example, where people needed monitoring devices and welfare checks to keep them safe. This meant people were being restricted without the correct legal safeguards in place.

Staff confirmed they had received training on the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). A staff member told us, “We receive this training annually. We must always assume that someone has capacity until we know otherwise. It’s about making sure people are safe and not taking away all their decision making”.

We observed people were asked for their consent before any care and support was provided by staff.