Heathlands Care Centre

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

At our last inspection, the provider was in breach of Regulation 17 (Good Governance), which relates to management oversight rather than the Responsive key question. At this inspection, although improvements had been made, the provider remained in breach as increased oversight was still required in relation to the lack of consistency found within care plans.

This service scored 64 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices. Whilst staff were seen to support people in a personalised way, the quality of people’s care plans varied significantly. We reviewed several people’s records, which lacked detail and were not reflective of people’s preferences and needs. For example, details of the healthcare support one person may need due to their religious beliefs were not clearly recorded in their care plan. In addition, we found that people’s needs had changed, care records had not always been comprehensively updated, which had led to contradictory information being present regarding people’s health and well-being needs.

In other instances, we found that people’s care plans were detailed and contained highly personalised information about how they wished to be supported. The manager told us they continued to work with staff to promote understanding of how to personalise people’s plans, ensuring that what was important to them was included.

Despite the concerns identified in relation to records, we observed staff knew people well and provided support in a person-centred way. Staff showed they understood people’s individual communication styles and showed people affection and warmth.

The manager had worked closely with health and social care professionals to understand the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

The service worked alongside health and social care professionals to improve systems and people’s individual care needs. Support from various teams, including the Care Home Support, Medicines Support and Mental Health teams, was accessed to implement safe processes, meet people’s needs and ensure the provision of effective care. Professionals involved in people’s care confirmed that the service was responsive to advice and learning.

Relatives and staff were also complimentary of the support provided by the local authority staff and consultant supporting the service. One staff member told us, “Having them here gives us the confidence we are doing things in the right way. We can ask their advice on how to deal with anything, and they will help us.”

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate, and up-to-date information in formats tailored to individual needs.

There was good signage throughout the home directing people to different areas. This was displayed in both written and pictorial formats, at a height where people could see it. In addition, there was a range of information displayed, such as menus, orientation boards, events and activity planners. These were also presented in different formats, using large print to support those with visual impairments. Staff had developed a specific communication notice board to support a person whose first language was not English. This contained information about the home, as well as useful phrases for people and staff to use when speaking with the person.

The manager made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result. However, people and their relatives told us of an ongoing issue with being able to watch television as they would often not be able to tune into the system. Whilst some efforts had been made to resolve the issue, this remained a problem and, for some people, was proving to be frustrating and upsetting. People, relatives and staff told us they felt the provider should do more to ensure this issue was rectified as this was important to people.

People and their relatives told us they felt they could discuss any concerns with the manager, who would respond. One person told us, “[Manager] is so very personable, and nothing is too much trouble.” A relative told us, “If you come in here and ask for something to be done, they always stop and do it, straight away.” A notice board had been developed to communicate with relatives and friends. This displayed ongoing improvements and developments within the service in addition to advertising events and gatherings to bring people together.

Feedback and photo displays showed the service had planned numerous social events to bring people, relatives, friends and staff together. These were well attended and included barbecues, cultural celebrations and a darts marathon. Comments received about the events showed they were well received. One staff member told us, “It has been so nice to have these things, to all relax together. It makes us feel more like a family together.”

The manager maintained a complaints log, which showed that any concerns received were responded to in line with the provider’s policy. The concerns raised were investigated, and action was taken to minimise them going forward.

The provider ensured that people could access the care, support, and treatment they needed when they needed it. The design of the home considered the needs of people living with dementia and mobility issues. There was good signage directing people to different areas, adapted bathrooms, wide corridors with handrails, and a lift to the home's upper floors. Where appropriate, people had memory boxes containing personal items outside their rooms to help orientate them, generate conversation and provide reassurance. Reminiscence areas had been created at the end of each corridor. Whilst we did not see people using these areas for this purpose, we noted that this provided a quiet area where people and staff sat chatting together in the afternoon.

People had access to healthcare support when they needed it. This included the GP, mental health team, opticians, podiatry and dentists in addition to any specialist services people required.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experiences or outcomes, and tailored their care, support, and treatment in response. The manager and nursing team acted as advocates for people who were unable to voice their needs. This included ensuring people and their relatives had choices over their care during times of ill health. One relative told us, “They have been very good at liaising with the doctors and the hospital, so everything gets done.”

People were not always supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their lives. Care plans regarding the support people wished to receive at the end of their lives were basic and lacked personalised information. The manager told us they had identified the need for staff to receive additional training in the planning and support of people’s end-of-life care and were in the process of sourcing this.

The service worked alongside a local hospice to support people at the end of their life to ensure they were able to remain pain free and comfortable. The manager told us they had a whole home approach to end-of-life care where all staff were able to sit with people and offer comfort. Support was also available to relatives, with accommodation made available to them where required. One relative told us of the importance of their family member being able to continue living at the home despite a significant deterioration in their health. They explained the service had made changes to accommodate their family member, which meant they were still able to have a quality of life.