We carried out a review of the data available to us about Heathercroft on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Heathercroft, you can give feedback on this service.
Heathercroft is a small residential care home that provides care and support for up to five people with a learning disability in one adapted building. At the time of our inspection the home was fully occupied.
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.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found:
The provider had good quality assurance processes in place that monitored a wide scope of practices and procedures by staff. However shortfalls identified by these processes such as the areas of the home that needed for redecoration were not always actioned . This meant improvements were not always made where they were needed.
Some areas of the premises such as the bathrooms and the hall, stairs and landing areas needed redecorations.
Relatives told us they thought their family members were safe living at Heathercroft. They said staff took appropriate measures to ensure people were protected from identified risks and potential abuse.
Staff told us the training they received to do with safeguarding adults helped to protect people from harm. Whistleblowing procedures were in place and displayed on notice boards for all to see. Staff told us they were confident any concerns they reported would be dealt with appropriately.
People’s needs and risks were assessed holistically and clear outcome based guidance set out for staff to follow in people’s care plans.
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.
Effective infection control procedures were in place and staff received training with food hygiene.
There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs and safe recruitment practices were in place.
People’s medicines were stored, administered, recorded and audited appropriately. The provider had appropriate policies and procedures in place to support people safely with their medicines as prescribed.
The new ‘Plan for Life’ format implemented at Heathercroft has ensured a comprehensive process of assessing people’s needs and risks is carried out. People’s needs were met in a personalised way with their agreement and that of their relatives.
Staff completed training to ensure they were able to meet people’s needs effectively. Support was provided appropriately for staff with regards to their professional roles.
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.
Records showed people were supported to have their health needs met, with access to health professionals as required.
Relatives of people told us their relationships with the staff team was good. They said their privacy and dignity was respected. They also said they were able to express their views and preferences and staff responded appropriately.
The concerns and complaints procedures meant that people were able to make complaints or raise concerns and have confidence they would be responded to in an appropriate way.
The provider worked collaboratively with other agencies and organisations to meet people’s needs.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at the last inspection
At the last inspection the service was rated good (published 21 June 2017).
Why we inspected:
This was a planned inspection in line with our inspection schedule based on the previous rating.
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.
This unannounced inspection took place on 22 May 2017. At the previous inspection in November 2014 we found the service to be meeting required standards and the overall rating was "Good".
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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. The registered manager was present on duty for the inspection.
People and their relatives told us they felt safe at the service and knew how to raise any concerns. Staff knew how to recognise signs of potential abuse and followed the right reporting procedures. People were supported by staff who received appropriate training and support to care for people safely and protect their human rights. The service had procedures in place whereby they assessed and identified risks to people’s health and safety. There were sufficient staff numbers to meet people’s needs and staff were employed after suitable checks had been made.
The service had systems in place for the safe storage, administration and recording of medicines. People were protected by the prevention and control of infection through the implementation of the home’s policies and procedures.
People were supported by staff who received appropriate training and support to do their job well. The service had an induction period for new staff and all staff had completed mandatory training. Staff felt supported by managers and people felt confident in the ability of staff to meet their needs.
Staff were aware of the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) that ensured people’s rights were protected. Staff ensured that people’s consent was sought before providing care and acted in people’s best interests where people lacked the capacity to make informed decisions.
People were supported to eat and drink enough and maintain a balanced diet and people’s preferences and dietary needs were being met. People made positive comments about the food at the service and staff were attentive and supportive to people during mealtimes.
People were supported to maintain good health, have access to healthcare services and receive on-going healthcare support. There were strong links with GP and other external health professionals and people’s care records contained accurate details of their health needs.
The design and layout of the home ensured that people could have access to all areas, including gardens, and receive visitors.
The staff and manager developed positive, caring relationships with people using the service through talking and listening to people in a way that people understood. Care records focused on people as individuals and gave clear information for staff. People who used the service and their relatives were complimentary about the caring attitude of staff and the quality of care they received.
The service supported people to express their views and be actively involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support. Care records were written in a way people could understand and people and their families were involved in discussions about how staff should care for them.
People’s privacy and dignity were respected and promoted through the service’s policies and procedures, staff training and practice. People told us they felt respected and we saw how people’s privacy and dignity were respected when they were receiving care or talking with staff.
People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs. People were supported to have care plans that reflected how they would like to receive their care, treatment and support. These included their personal history, individual preferences, interests and aspirations, and aimed to make sure they had as much choice and control as possible.
People were supported to use and maintain links with the wider community, for example, to visit the local area, retain membership of clubs and education and receive external visitors.
The service had systems in place to allow people to raise any concerns and voice complaints in a way that was convenient and manageable for people. The service’s complaints procedure enabled the service to routinely listen and learn from people’s experiences, concerns and complaints and resolve them appropriately.
The service promoted a positive culture that was person-centred, open, inclusive and empowering for people. People and their relatives described the atmosphere in the home as open and friendly and they felt that communication was good between staff and people. Staff felt that the culture of the service was open and transparent, with clear lines of accountability which enabled staff to share ideas and raise any problems. Staff felt confident in their ability to discuss any concern about the quality of care with the manager or other senior colleague.
There was a registered manager in post. People and staff felt the service was well-managed and that there were clear and transparent processes in place for staff to account for their decisions, actions, behaviours and performance. There were systems in place to carry out quality and safety audits and checks and we saw that these were carried out regularly.
The service had systems in place to ask for and collect the views of people, their relatives and staff in order to regularly review how people experienced their care and how the quality of care and service could be improved. The manager had developed links with professional organisations in order to continually update knowledge and had established strong links with the local authority, safeguarding teams and other professionals in order to ensure that people received appropriate care and support.
Records and information were held securely and confidentially.
Heathercroft is a residential care home, providing accommodation and personal care for up to five people with learning disabilities. Heathercroft has a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and shares the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law with the provider.
At our previous inspection in April 2013, we found the provider was meeting the regulations we inspected.
Some people were able to tell us directly what their views were of the service, whilst others used other forms of communication such as sign language, gestures and other responses to questions. Everyone we spoke with told us or otherwise indicated that they felt safe using the service. Staff were trained in safeguarding adults and the service had policies and procedures in place to ensure that the service responded appropriately to allegations or suspicions of abuse. The service ensured that people’s human rights were respected and took action to assess and minimise risks to people. Staff had received training on behaviour that may challenge and the service consulted with other professionals about managing aspects of behaviour safely.
All of the people we spoke with either told us or indicated that they thought that staff were friendly and helpful. Throughout our inspection we observed that staff were caring and attentive to people. Staff approached people with dignity and respect and demonstrated a good understanding of people’s needs. Staff were quick to respond when people needed support.
There were enough qualified and skilled staff at the service. Staffing numbers and shifts were managed to suit people's needs so that people received their care when they needed and wanted it. Staff had access to information, support and training that they needed to do their jobs well. The provider’s training programme was designed to meet the needs of people using the service so that staff had the knowledge they required to care for people effectively.
People were provided with a range of activities in and outside the service which met their individual needs and interests. People were encouraged to build and develop their independent living skills both in the service and in the community.
Care plans contained information about the health and social care support people needed and records showed they were supported to access other professionals when required. People were involved in making decisions about their care. Where people's needs changed, the provider responded and reviewed the care provided.
People using the service and staff told us they found the manager to be approachable and accessible. We observed an open and inclusive atmosphere in the service and the manager led by example. Staff were happy working for the service and motivated to provide person centred care.
The provider had a number of audits and quality assurance programmes in place. These included action plans so the provider could monitor whether necessary changes were made and ensure high standards were being maintained.
The service had effective procedures for reporting and investigating incidents and accidents. There were systems to learn from incidents and adverse events and protect people from the risks of similar events happening again.
We saw the people who used the service were well supported by the staff who treated everyone with respect and dignity. We also found staff were suitably trained and supported to effectively meet the needs and wishes of the people who lived at Heathercroft.
However, although people receiving services in the home were happy and well supported by staff; the provider may wish to note that some parts of the home's interior had not been adequately maintained.
The provider did have effective systems in place to routinely assess and monitor the quality of the service people who lived at Heathercroft received.