Heron Court

Updated 4 July 2018

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, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This was a comprehensive inspection, which took place on 19 April 2018 and was unannounced. The inspection team was made up of two inspectors and an expert by experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Prior to the inspection, we reviewed information we held about the service including the inspection history, feedback from people and commissioners and statutory notifications. A notification is information about important events, which the service is required to send to us by law.

Over the course of our inspection visit we spoke with the registered manager, the regional manager, the administrator and five care staff. We also spoke with 13 people who used the service and three relatives. We reviewed various documents including four people’s care records, three staff files and other relevant documentation such as training records, quality audits and minutes of meetings.

Updated 4 July 2018

The inspection was completed on the 19 April 2018 and was unannounced.

Heron Court is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The care home accommodates up to 35 older people some of whom may be living with dementia in one building. At the time of the inspection, there were 30 people living at Heron Court.

Heron Court is a large detached house building in a quiet rural area in Hutton, Brentwood. The premises is set out on two floors and there are adequate communal facilities available for people to make use of within the service.

At the last comprehensive inspection in February 2016, the service was rated good. Subsequently in May 2017 we completed a focussed inspection in response to information of concern we had received regarding poor quality catheter care. At that inspection, we found the concerns unfounded and the rating remained good. At this inspection, we found the service continued to be good and the rating remains the same.

There was 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.

People were protected from the risk of abuse as staff had received training in safeguarding and were aware of their responsibilities and how to report any concerns.

Individual risks to people had been assessed and regularly reviewed. Management plans were in place to support staff to keep people safe. Medicines were safely managed by staff who had been trained and assessed as competent.

There were sufficient staff employed who had been safely recruited. Lessons had been learned and improvements in infection control practices and staffing levels had been made to promote the safety and wellbeing of people.

Staff received training, supervision and appraisals of their practice to equip them with the skills and knowledge required to support people effectively.

People were supported to have enough to eat and drink and had access to healthcare and treatment when their health needs changed. The home environment was warm and welcoming and met the needs of the people who lived there.

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 were kind and caring and treated people with dignity and respect. Staff knew people well and people were included in decisions about their care and support. Independence was supported and encouraged.

Visitors were made welcome at the service, which meant that people were supported to maintain relationships that were important to them.

Care plans were personalised and were regularly reviewed with people to reflect their current needs and wishes. If people had particular wishes for end of life care these were also discussed and recorded.

People were provided with opportunities to engage in a range of activities at the service and in the community. The service had formed links with the local community to facilitate social inclusion.

We made a recommendation about supporting people to engage in activities that are meaningful to them.

People and staff were included in the running of the service. People’s opinions were sought and the service responded positively to feedback to make any necessary improvements.

Quality assurance systems were in place to monitor the safety and effectiveness of the service and drive improvements. There was robust oversight of the service and clear lines of accountability at staff, management and provider level.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.