You are here

Heather Holmes Care Home Requires improvement

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 24 August 2019

About the service

Heather Holmes is a residential care home providing personal care for up to 12 people in one adapted building. It specialises in supporting people who have learning disabilities and or autism. At the time of our inspection, there were 10 people living at the home.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes.

The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties. It was registered for the support of up to 12 people. Ten people were using the service. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However. the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the building design fitting into the residential area and the other large domestic homes of a similar size.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

The provider's quality assurance systems and processes were not always as effective as they needed to be. They had not enabled the provider to ensure staff always maintained accurate and complete records of people's care or ensured a consistent approach to risk assessment.

The provider's risk assessment procedures required strengthening. The registered manager advised that care plans were in the process of migration to a new standardised process. However, consistency was needed when risk assessments were being evaluated and used by staff to keep people safe. Staff were clear how to identify and report abuse.

People's needs were assessed before they moved into the home. People were protected from the risk of infections; however, improvements were needed in relation to infection control practices.

The provider followed safe recruitment procedures. Staff received ongoing training and management support to enable them to work safely and effectively.

People had enough to eat and drink and any associated risks were managed with appropriate specialist input.

Staff worked effectively with community health and social care professionals to achieve positive outcomes for people and ensure their health needs were met.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interest. Policies and systems were in place; however, staff practice did not always follow policy in relation to the administration of Deprivation of Liberty safeguards (DoLS).

Staff knew the people they supported well and adopted a caring approach towards their work.

People were encouraged to express their views about the care provided, and these were listened to. People were treated with dignity and respect at all times.

People's care plans were individual to them, covered key aspects of their care needs and promoted a person-centred approach.

People had support to participate in a range of therapeutic, social and recreational activities.

People and their relatives understood how to raise any concerns or complaints with the provider.

The management team promoted effective engagement with people, their relatives and community professionals. Staff felt well-supported and valued

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Rig

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 24 August 2019

The service was not always safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 24 August 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 24 August 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 24 August 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 24 August 2019

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-led findings below.