You are here

Heathcotes (Hembrigg Park) Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 5 October 2017

We carried out the inspection of Heathcotes Hembrigg Park on 16 and 22 August 2017. At the time of our inspection there were six people using the service. This was an unannounced inspection.

Heathcotes (Hembrigg Park) is a specialist service supporting females with personality disorders to become more independent and learn new skills over a 12 month period.

The home 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. In the report we refer to the home manager, the registered manager and the regional manager who were separate managers.

We saw that some of the communal internal and external areas in the home looked clean and were repaired when required. We noted the home manager was in the process of implementing improvements needed in the home.

We found that the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty (DoLS) 2009 legislation had been adhered to in the home. The manager knew the people at the home who lacked capacity. We found however that the appropriate Deprivation of Liberty Safeguard (DoLS) applications had been submitted to the Local Authority in relation to people's care.

The people living in the home were able to express themselves and were able to choose the way they spent their day. They were taken to activities outside the home and encouraged to keep family connections by visiting relatives where possible.

People had access to sufficient quantities of nutritious food and drink throughout the day and were given suitable menu choices at each mealtime, these options had been chosen by the people who lived at Heathcotes Hembrigg Park.

We found that staff were well trained and supported. They were able to demonstrate skill and competency in their knowledge about personality disorder and the support people required. The people who lived at the home were clearly happy with the support that staff gave them and there was a good rapport between them.

We checked the medication cabinet which was stored in a locked room. We saw that medication was given as directed and stored appropriately. We talked with staff who were able to demonstrate their knowledge of safeguarding and were able to tell us how to report abuse.

Each of the people's bedrooms had been personalised by the people who lived in them. People who were able were able to lock their bedroom doors, choose who entered their rooms and go in and out of the front door freely. However they were encouraged to plan their time and let staff know their whereabouts .

Care records, risk assessments, staff records and other documents relating to the running of the home, were well-kept and up-to-date. Each person living at the home had a personalised care plan and risk assessment.

We found that recruitment practices were in place which included the completion of pre-employment checks prior to a new member of staff working at the service. Staff received regular training and supervision to enable them to work safely and effectively.

Inspection areas



Updated 5 October 2017

The service was safe.

People were supported by sufficient staff who had been recruited in a safe way.

Medication was safely managed in the service.

Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff knew what to do in the event of an allegation. People told us that they felt safe.



Updated 5 October 2017

The service was effective.

The requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) had been fully implemented to protect people's rights.

All staff received appropriate induction, supervision and appraisal and had continued to be trained according to the needs of the people they supported.

People had enough to eat and drink and a choice of suitable nutritious foods to meet their dietary needs.



Updated 5 October 2017

The service was caring.

Staff showed that they have a good relationship with the people they supported.

Confidentiality of peoples care files was evident.

There was no limitations on visiting by relatives unless a judgement was in place.



Updated 5 October 2017

The service was responsive.

The complaints procedure was openly displayed and service specific.

People who lived in the home had a support plan which appropriately reviewed and reflected their needs.

People had prompt access to other healthcare professionals when required and this was fully documented.



Updated 5 October 2017

The service was well-led.

The service had a manager who was registered with the Care Quality Commission.

The registered manager was clearly visible and staff said communication was encouraged.

The service had up to date policies in place.