• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Heathcotes (Ashbrook House)

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

3 Poplar Street, Wellingborough, Northamptonshire, NN8 4PL (01933) 275087

Provided and run by:
Heathcotes Care Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

All Inspections

27 June 2019

During a routine inspection

Heathcotes (Ashbrook House) is a care home service without nursing. The home provides accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care. The home can accommodate up to six older adults with learning disabilities in one adapted building. At the time of the inspection three people were receiving care at the home.

The home 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.

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

Quality assurance processes undertaken by the provider were not robust and failed to ensure that the required standards of quality and safety were being met consistently. Feedback from people and staff was not acted on to drive continual improvements in the service.

Documents relating to the use of physical restraint were not robust and provided poor oversight into the physical intervention.

People’s care plans included assessments of risks associated with their care. Staff had not always followed the risk assessments to ensure people received safe care. Staff knew how to respond to and report any concerns about people’s safety and well-being.

People were supported by staff that knew how to keep them safe and knew how to raise any concerns regarding people’s safety with the provider and the relevant safeguarding body and the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

People were supported to stay healthy. Staff encouraged people to live healthier lives, encouraged healthy eating and supported people to attend all medical appointments. Staff were committed to enabling people to socialise and develop and maintain relationships.

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 interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

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.

People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff that were safely recruited to meet their needs. Staff supported people to take their prescribed medicines safely. Staff followed good practice infection control guidelines to help prevent the spread of infection.

People were supported by staff who had the right skills and knowledge to provide care that met people’s assessed needs. Staff were alert and responsive to changes in people's needs. They liaised with relatives and health professionals in a timely manner which helped to support people's health and well-being.

Policies, procedures and other relevant information was made available to people in formats that met their communication needs, such as easy read and picture styles.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good (published 13/03/2018).

Why we inspected

The inspection was prompted in part by notification of a specific incident. Following which a person using the service died. This incident is subject to a criminal investigation. As a result, this inspection did not examine the circumstances of the incident.

The information CQC received about the incident indicated concerns about the management of choking and risk assessments. This inspection examined those risks.

We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements.

You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

29 January 2018

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 29 January 2018 and was unannounced.

Heathcotes (Ashbrook House) is a 'care home'. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Heathcotes (Ashbrook House) is registered to accommodate up to six people. The service supports people with autism and a learning disability. The service is a house with six bedrooms and communal living areas, in a residential area in Wellingborough. The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the ‘Registering the Right Support’ and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen. At the time of our inspection, five people were living at the service.

The service had 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 safe, and staff had an understanding of abuse and the safeguarding procedures that should be followed to report abuse. People had risk assessments in place to cover any risks that were present within their lives, but also enable them to be as independent as possible. All the staff we spoke with were confident that any concerns they raised would be followed up appropriately by the registered manager.

Staffing levels were adequate to meet people's current needs, and rotas showed that staffing was

consistent.

The staff recruitment procedures ensured that appropriate pre-employment checks were carried out to ensure only suitable staff worked at the service. References and security checks were carried out as required.

Staff attended induction training where they completed mandatory training courses and were able to shadow more experienced staff giving care. Staff told us that they were able to update their mandatory training with refresher courses.

Staff supported people with the administration of medicines, and were trained to do so. The people we spoke with were happy with the support they received.

Staff were well supported by the registered manager and senior team, and had one to one supervisions and observations.

People's consent was gained before any care was provided and the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were met. Consent forms were signed and within people's files.

People were able to choose the food and drink they wanted and staff supported people with this. Staff supported people to access health appointments when necessary. Health professionals were involved with people's support as and when required.

Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect and spent time getting to know them and their specific needs and wishes. People told us they were happy with the way that staff spoke to them, and they provided their care in a respectful and dignified manner.

People were involved in their own care planning as much as they could be, and were able to contribute to the way in which they were supported. Care planning was personalised and mentioned people's likes and dislikes, so that staff understood their needs fully. People were in control of their care and listened to by staff.

The service had a complaints procedure in place. This ensured people and their families were able to provide feedback about their care and to help the service make improvements where required. The people we spoke with knew how to use it.

Quality monitoring systems and processes were in place and comprehensive audits were taking place within the service to identify where improvements could be made.

The service worked in partnership with other agencies to ensure quality of care across all levels.

Communication was open and honest, and improvements were highlighted and worked upon as required.