The Heathers

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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated good.

This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

We saw staff chatting to people, laughing and being friendly. People told us staff were ‘lovely’. The provider told us how he encouraged staff to spend time talking with people once their care tasks were completed. The manager told us how he was changing staff understanding of care, he said, “Before they just used to do as they were told, they were not inquisitive, they did nothing beyond their tasks, I am trying to change all that.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People had care plans created when they arrived at the home. These included information gathered from their assessment and from their ongoing needs. Staff knew how to communicate with people who were living with dementia, for example a staff member told us, “I have composed and use, an easy read form, that covers suggestions for all areas of people’s care with separate sections, including menus and activities, that residents can complete independently or with support.”

The provider did not always supply appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.
While there were easy to understand signs around the home, there was a lack of accurate meal information. For example, on the first day of the assessment the menus on the tables in the dining room did not correspond with the food offered. The provider told us this would be addressed.
There was also a lack of a welcome pack for new residents or relatives, although this was something the provider was working towards.
People and relatives were able to talk to staff and obtain some information from posters around the home. This included how make a complaint and contact details of the local authority and the Care Quality Commission.
 

The provider 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.
The provider was happy to receive feedback from people and relatives. People could attend residents’ meetings to discuss care and life at the home, and there was a suggestions/comments box in the hallway. The provider told us he was in the process of changing this for a simple touch screen review panel to encourage more frequent feedback.
 

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People had access to other health care professionals as needed. During the assessment we spoke with a visiting healthcare professional who told us the communication with the home was good and the staff were always helpful.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.
Some people at The Heathers were living with dementia. Staff ensured they were able to have input into their care and staff tailored their support accordingly. We spoke to people at the home who were able to tell us they were happy. The provider had implemented a new electronic care system, so staff were able to record care in real time. The provider told us staff had initially been reluctant to use the technology but had begun to see the benefits as they could see through the day how people were responding to care.
 

People were 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 life.
We saw care plans included information about people’s wishes and choices at end of life and for ongoing treatment. Staff knew that some people were unable to make complex choices and always took time to support people with this where they could. A staff member told us, “If a resident is unable to decide on something important or unable to communicate, I follow what’s recorded in their care plan already or we seek advice from their next of kin or legal power of attorney.”