Hegarty Care

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.

At our last assessment we rated this key question outstanding. At this assessment the rating has remained outstanding.

This meant services were tailored to meet the needs of individuals and delivered to ensure flexibility, choice and continuity of care.

This service scored 93 (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 was exceptional at ensuring people were at the centre of all care and treatment decisions. Staff worked in genuine partnership with people, adapting support as their needs or preferences changed.

The service had a highly inclusive culture. Photos of people taking part in activities, spending time with staff and enjoying day trips were displayed throughout the home, helping create a sense of belonging and identity. People proudly shared these with the inspector, clearly enjoying reminiscing and celebrating their experiences. A memory collage for a former resident showed the service’s commitment to honouring people’s lives.

Daily routines were entirely shaped by people’s choices. There were no set mealtimes, and people could eat alone or together and were encouraged to prepare meals where possible. Activities were not planned in advance; instead, people chose what they wanted to do each day and which staff member would support them. People enjoyed trips to local coffee shops, charity shops, the arcade, and days out such as the circus or local attractions. The provider listened to people’s interests and purchased passes so they could continue returning to places they enjoyed.

Positive Behaviour Support plans were highly personalised, clearly identifying triggers and effective de‑escalation techniques. Staff understood these plans extremely well and used respectful, proactive approaches that promoted autonomy and reduced distress.

Staff were passionate about providing meaningful, high‑quality support. People were encouraged to work alongside staff to build skills in cooking and housekeeping. The registered manager was enthusiastic about innovation and continually looked for ways to maintain exceptional levels of personalised care.

Overall, people experienced an outstanding level of choice, involvement and independence, supported by a team who knew them well and consistently celebrated what made them unique.

The provider had an exceptional understanding of 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 highly detailed and personalised hospital passports in place, for use with any planned admissions or emergency events. These documents ensured people’s care and support needs could be met if they were away from the service. The service ensured that people were supported to understand and effectively communicate with other healthcare professionals.

Support records clearly demonstrated how well the provider ensured the service and external professionals worked together to provide truly coordinated care. This seamless partnership meant people experienced consistent support that adapted quickly to their changing needs. Transitions between services such as returning home after a hospital stay or adjusting to new support requirements were handled with exceptional care and planning. As a result, people experienced far less anxiety or disruption, helping them feel reassured, supported, and safe throughout every stage of their journey.

The provider strived to ensure that everyone had excellent continuity of care, and that all necessary appointments went smoothly to ensure people had the best possible outcomes. We also saw that action was taken by the provider to address and improve the experiences of future health appointments for people. For example, the provider had worked closely with health professionals, such as dentists to ensure that reasonable adjustments were in place to minimise distress and offer a more positive visit to such services. This multi-agency approach ensured the best possible outcomes for people.

Visiting professionals gave positive feedback about the way the service worked in partnership with them, to achieve positive outcomes or transitions for people.

The provider was exceptional at ensuring people received accurate, up‑to‑date information in formats tailored to their individual needs. A wide range of accessible materials were consistently available, enabling people to understand their care, treatment and support in ways that made sense to them. This high standard was evident throughout the environment and reflected in the clarity and quality of documentation and day‑to‑day practice.

Because not all people communicated verbally, staff showed exceptional skill in interpreting individuals’ communication styles. Staff had developed strong, trusting relationships with people, allowing them to recognise and respond to subtle cues and body language. This enabled staff to act quickly to meet people’s needs, significantly reducing distress and helping maintain a calm, reassuring atmosphere.

The service celebrated individuality and supported people to express themselves. Religious festivals and special days were marked within the service, with people actively involved in planning events. Staff communicated using each person’s preferred methods and adapted their approach where needed. We saw staff teaching people sign language and supporting others to learn to write their name, which individuals proudly shared. This helped people communicate with each other more effectively and encouraged meaningful connection.

Easy‑read and pictorial guides were available throughout the home and were personalised to each person’s communication needs. Where visual prompts were used, the guides included familiar images such as the person’s own face or staff they recognised. This thoughtful, individualised approach ensured information was not only accessible but engaging and relevant.

The registered manager also demonstrated outstanding leadership in ensuring information from external professionals was accessible and supportive. For example, when visits from unfamiliar professionals caused stress, anxiety and an increase in distress and anxiety, the registered manager proactively requested photographs of the professional, and what the visit would involve. Staff used these to prepare people in advance, explaining who was coming to the home and why, using visuals, simple language and communication tools tailored to each person.

The provider demonstrated an outstanding commitment to ensuring every person could understand and participate in their care. The highly personalised communication support empowered people, promoted independence and created an environment where everyone felt informed, included and valued.

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.

People were fully involved as partners in their care. People all told us that they felt listened to, and their opinions were valued. The complaints procedure was accessible to people, with visual guidance on how to raise any concerns displayed in reception, and at various locations around the service.

There were easy read contact details displayed across the service, for CQC and the Adult Safeguarding team, along with other important information. People were supported to understand how they could access these if needed.

There were robust complaints policy and procedures available in formats suitable for people to understand. This was given to people and relatives as part of their service user guide.

People who used the service told us they felt able to raise any concerns with the manager or staff and felt assured they would be dealt with. Where people had raised any concerns, we saw this had been clearly documented, reviewed, and outcomes discussed and shared with people to help them understand these. Their complaints were responded to in writing, but the response was also read to people were they were unable to do so themselves.

The provider was exceptional at ensuring people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff consistently ensured that people had fair and meaningful opportunities to participate in community life and attend medical appoints, regardless of their individual anxieties, abilities or support needs. The culture across the service was one of enabling, not limiting, with staff actively removing barriers so people could access the same opportunities as anyone else.

We saw that information was provided in a variety of formats that were accessible to people, to ensure they were fully included. The provider was aware of the importance of removing barriers to care, and supported people with disabilities, communication needs, or other protected characteristics. Reasonable adjustments were made to enhance communication and an accessible premises, to help ensure that care was safe, inclusive and equitable.

Staff worked hard to mitigate barriers and support people to ensure they were not discriminated against due to their disabilities.

Records showed people's oral health, weights, (along with blood pressure, and other clinical observations) were recorded regularly and any areas of concern shared promptly. These observations gave a good indication of the overall health of people using the service. People had been supported to attend routine medical appointments.

Staff had carried out a teaching session for the male residents on how to check for testicular cancer. This had been done in a way that people could understand, using talking, pictures and props to help develop an awareness on this important topic. This showed the service took a proactive approach to supporting national public health initiatives.

External stakeholders provided positive feedback about the care provided and found the staff team communicated well with them and responded to any information requests promptly.

Staff and leaders were innovative in how they listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. Staff and leaders actively used this information to provide exceptionally tailored care, support and treatment in response to this.

The outcomes for people using the service truly reflected the principles and values of 'Right support, right care, right culture', promoting choice, independence, control, and inclusion. People and those important to them were recognised as the true experts in their own lives, with an emphasis on what they could achieve first, followed by any support they required.

Staff consistently championed people’s rights and upheld equality and diversity with respect.

The whole staff team showed an in-depth practical knowledge in meeting the needs of people living at the service, but they continued to look for and achieve further improvements in their knowledge and skill sets. The registered manager's expected standards were exceptionally high, and staff were committed in achieving these.

Throughout the service we saw ample evidence of the wide range of activities that people had participated in. The provider thought of creative ways to support people in accessing hobbies they are unable to currently do. For example, one person used to enjoy going to theme parks and rollercoasters. Due to a change in their physical needs, they are unable to do so. Staff found a rollercoaster simulator for the person to use, enabling them to relive the excitement and joy they experienced previously had and no longer thought possible.

People were given exceptional support to plan for important life changes, so they could make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

The registered manager supported people to consider and plan for their future needs, even when these conversations were initially difficult. Some people and family members were naturally reluctant to discuss future care arrangements, including changing health needs or long‑term planning. Despite this, the registered manager approached the topic sensitively, respectfully and at the individual’s pace.

Rather than avoiding these discussions, the registered manager revisited them at appropriate times, ensuring they were conducted in a calm, supportive and unpressured way. They used clear, accessible language and adapted their communication to meet each person’s needs. This approach helped reduce anxiety and enabled people and families to engage gradually when they felt more comfortable.

The registered manager also ensured that people were not asked to make decisions before they felt prepared. Conversations were spaced appropriately, giving time for reflection. When families remained unsure, the manager explored their concerns sensitively and reassured them that planning was intended to support the person’s wellbeing, not to pre‑empt change unnecessarily.

Where a person had expressed clear directives on how they would like their funeral care to be, staff had ensured that this was recorded and shared with the appropriate people, respecting their views and enabling them to ensure that their end of life wishes could be honoured.