The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Highclere Care Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

1 Chapman Avenue, Downs Barn, Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, MK14 7NH

Provided and run by:
Bupa Care Homes (BNH) Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

All Inspections

11 January 2017

During a routine inspection

Care service description:

Highclere Care Home is registered to provide accommodation and support for 41 people who require nursing or personal care, ranging from frail elderly, dementia care and nursing needs. The service is purpose-built and has good access to local amenities and transport services. At the time of our inspection there were 39 people using the service.

Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.

Why we inspected – The inspection was prompted in part by concerns raised in relation to poor staffing levels at the service.

Risk List :

Insufficient Staffing levels

Rating at this inspection:

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated:

People felt safe. Staff had been provided with training to enable them to recognise signs and symptoms of abuse. People had risk assessments in place to enable them to maintain their independence. Observations showed that staffing at the service was adequate to meet people’s needs. However this was not always delivered in a timely manner. Effective recruitment procedures were in place and medicines were managed safely.

Staff received training and supervision to enable them to carry out their roles and responsibilities. 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. People were able to make choices about the food and drink they had and staff supported people to access a variety of health professionals.

People said staff were kind and compassionate and staff knew about people’s preferences and personal histories. People’s views were listened to and they were actively encouraged to be involved in their care and support. Staff ensured that people’s privacy and dignity was upheld. Any information about people was respected and treated confidentially.

Comprehensive assessments were completed before people were admitted to the service. Care plans reflected how people’s needs should be met. There was a complaints procedure to enable people to raise complaints.

The service was led by a registered manager who had support from the provider. Quality monitoring systems were in place and a variety of audits were carried out and used to drive improvement.

5 March 2015

During a routine inspection

Highclere Nursing Home is registered to provide accommodation and support for 41 people who require nursing or personal care, ranging from frail elderly, dementia care and nursing needs. On the day of our inspection, there were 38 people living in the home.

The inspection was unannounced and took place on 5 March 2015.

The service had 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.

People felt safe living in the service. Staff had an understanding of abuse and the safeguarding procedures that should be followed to report potential abuse.

Risk assessments within people’s care records were completed accurately and reviewed regularly. Staff knew how to manage risks to promote people’s safety, and balanced these against people’s rights to take risks.

Staff were not allowed to commence employment until robust checks had taken place to establish that they were safe to work with people.

There were adequate numbers of staff on duty to support people safely and ensure that people’s needs were met appropriately.

Systems and processes in place ensured that the administration, storage, disposal and handling of medicines were safe.

There was a positive culture within the service that was demonstrated by the attitudes of staff that were supported through a system of induction and training based on people’s needs.

Staff understood the processes in place to protect people who could not make decisions and followed the legal requirements outlined in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People had a good choice of meals and were able to get snacks and fluids throughout the day.

People had access to health care professionals to make sure they received appropriate care and treatment to meet their individual needs. Staff followed advice given by professionals to make sure people received the treatment they needed.

People were relaxed, comfortable and happy with the staff that supported them. Staff talked with people in a friendly manner and assisted people as required, whilst encouraging them to be as independent as possible.

There were regular reviews of care for each person who used the service which enabled individual care to be monitored.

Communication in the home was good and staff felt able to make suggestions. There were regular meetings for staff which gave them an opportunity to share ideas and give information about possible improvements to the registered manager.

People and their relatives knew who to speak to if they wanted to raise a concern. There were systems in place for responding to complaints.

The service was led by a registered manager who had support from the provider. Staff strived to provide good quality care for people and took the chance to learn lessons so improvements could be made in the future.

30 May 2013

During a routine inspection

We met and spoke in private with three people in the home who told us that they liked the staff, felt safe, and received the care support they needed. They all said that the food was "very good".

We also spoke with two visitors and they said they were pleased with the standard of care their relatives had received. One relative commented that the staff were always "very attentive" and helpful.

We found the home to be clean, comfortable, and free from odour throughout.

We found that 'Highclere Nursing Home' was appropriately staffed and met the nursing and personal care needs of the people in residence.

15 October 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with people who used the service, they told us that the staff were kind and they were looked after very well. We found that care plans and risk assessments were regularly updated and there were adequate staff to meet the needs of people. We found minor concerns relating to the administration of one of the medicines.

22 November 2011

During a routine inspection

People said they enjoyed living in the home and were generally happy with the care provided. We were told that people had been involved when planning their care and during care reviews. People said they knew who to approach should they have concerns.

Two people said they felt that at times there was a staff shortage. One person said she felt that one more staff member was required on each shift as staff appeared to be pushed for time and a consequence of this was that medication may not always be given on time.

People said their ongoing health care needs had been managed by allied healthcare professionals such as the GP, Physiotherapist and Optician. One person described her experience with the visiting optician as not positive as visits had been short, had took place at lunch time and spectacles provided had not met her needs.

One person identified a loss of personal independence since moving into the home; whilst another person said she has maintained her independence.

People said the home provided a choice of activities and occassionally they had chosen to attend external events. One person said activities could be disorganised at times, whilst another person said she had been unable to join in activities due to her eye sight problems.

People said they enjoyed the food at the home and they had a choice of two to three main course options at each meal. We were told that people could request alternative meal options if the choices on the menu were not to their liking. People confirmed they had been able to access sufficient drinks throughout the day and night and that food and fluid intake had been documented on food and fluid charts for some people. One person said staff had assisted her when required at meal-times.