Archived: Hevercourt

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect. At our last assessment we rated this key question inadequate. At this assessment the rating has remained inadequate. This meant people were not treated with compassion and there were breaches of dignity.

The service was in breach of legal regulation in relation to people not being treated in a respectful and dignified way.

This service scored 35 (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 did not treat people with kindness, empathy and compassion, or respect their privacy and dignity. On the evening of the first day of inspection, we observed staff undertaking night medicine administration. They told us they started the medicine round at 22.00 and we observed this was not completed until 23.30 and staff had to wake some people up to give them their medicines. We also noted from care notes for 5 people a member of staff had frequently administered medicines to them between 23.58pm and 00.30am. The provider told us, “All staff have been instructed not to wake residents unnecessarily, and this is always something they try to avoid as a good night’s sleep is recognised as being very important.” However, according to the care notes, on the majority of occasions each of the people had been recorded as being asleep within 15 to 60 minutes prior to the medicine being administered indicating the person had been woken.

Waking people up for medication at night can have negative impacts on their sleep quality, cognitive function, and overall well-being. It can lead to sleep disturbance, which could result in distressed behaviour and impaired cognitive function.

There were people and relatives that felt staff were caring. Comments included, “The staff are kind to me” and “They’ve (staff) always been very lovely.” We did find some instances of staff being considerate to people. We observed a member of staff spent time reassuring a person who was worried they had no money. They took time to talk to them about their family, and reminded the person that they lived in the home did not need any money. Another member of staff talked to another person kindly and compassionately and did not rush them when they were supporting them to the bathroom. The person asked if it was lunchtime and care staff gently explained that it was not ready yet, but that it would be soon if they would like to sit down

The provider did not treat people as individuals or make sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences.

The provider failed to ensure people had access to meaningful and person-centred activities. Comments from people included, “There’s not been activities lately, we have a sing song now and then” and “We don’t really do activities.” Relatives’ comments included, “I don’t think (staff) do anything to engage them. They never go out. They get no fresh air, now there’s music on but yesterday it was quiet.”

During the day inspection, we observed people were sat in the dining room and side lounges throughout the morning with little to occupy them. There was lack of meaningful activities being offered to them. We saw from people’s care notes that meaningful activities were not always taking place. For example, in 1 person’s care notes over a 36 day period there were no activities recorded for 20 days. In another person’s care plan, there were no activities recorded for 24 days. Meaningful activities are crucial for people living with dementia as they offer numerous benefits including improved physical and mental health, enhanced mood, reduced loneliness, and a sense of purpose. These activities can also help maintain cognitive function, promote social interaction, and improve overall well-being, allowing people to feel more engaged, connected, and valued.

We also observed 1 person, who was cared for in bed, had very little meaningful interaction with staff aside from when they were receiving personal care or being supported with their meals. It stated in their care plan “I like when staff sit with me, and I like the radio on in my room so I'm not lonely.’ We observed staff did not leave the radio on for person which left at risk of social isolation.

The provider did not promote people’s independence, so people did not know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

Leaders failed to ensure people had choices around their preferences of care. We noted from 6 people’s care notes over 1 month, that they were provided all of their morning personal care by night staff between 04.00 and 05.30 on the majority of days. One person told us, “I got woken early at 6am, it’s early really.” The provider told us in response to us asking why this was, that this would be because some people would need to be supported with incontinence. They said, “Everybody has a choice when to get up.” However, the records stated that in addition to having a wash and their continence aids changed they were also having their teeth cleaned, hair brushed, finger and toenails checked and the ‘curtains adjusted for the time of day’. In addition, there was no record indicating they all required this care at this time due to a concern with their continence or that it was people’s preferences.

We found those people that were on modified diets were not given choices of meals. The chef told us that those on a soft or pureed diet would have the most appropriate option from the 2 choices other people had.

The provider did not listen to or understand people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff did not respond to people’s needs in the moment or act to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

On the day inspection, we observed multiple people sitting in hard backed dining room chairs in the dining room for several hours. Where people had fallen asleep in the chairs staff were not encouraging people to move to more comfortable chairs in the lounges. Sitting in hard, unsupportive chairs for extended periods in care homes can negatively impact people’s physical and mental well-being.

In addition, at 11.00 am, when we entered the dining room where the majority of people were sitting, there was music playing that was very loud, and people had difficulty making themselves heard. The registered manager came into the dining room and asked for the music to be turned down as it was too loud. However, staff had not considered the impact of this beforehand. Loud music in the service can be detrimental to people’s well-being due to its potential to cause confusion, agitation, and increased anxiety. Staff did not consider the impact of this on people.

We observed there were 2 people in one of the lounges. Both were asleep from 11.00 until 12:19, however during this time no staff came to check on them or to interact with them in any way.