CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Heanton Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Heanton Nursing Home: inspected but not rated; inspectors found plans in place for infection control in an empty five-bed wing.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 21 December 2020. It looked at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
The inspection covered a separate five-bed wing, which was empty at the time. Inspectors found plans for safe admissions, separate staffing, cleaning, PPE, testing, social distancing and visiting arrangements.
The home was assured in all the infection-control areas checked. CQC also signposted the provider to resources to develop its approach. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a rating for the quality of care overall.
Separate infection-control arrangements
The wing had its own entrance, staff team, cleaning arrangements and staff break area. This was intended to reduce contact with the main premises and support infection control.
“A separate staff team had been sourced who would only work in the wing, including domestic staff.” from the report
PPE and staff training
Staff had training on putting on and removing PPE and on the coronavirus pandemic. PPE was available around the wing.
“Staff had received training on donning and doffing and on the coronavirus pandemic from various sources” from the report
Testing and admission plans
The provider had regular testing programmes and clear contingency and admission plans. These included access for people arriving by ambulance.
“There were regular people and staff testing programmes in place.” from the report
Suitable layout and cleanliness
The rooms were clean, the wing could be ventilated, and the communal area was large enough to support social distancing.
“The wing was able to be well ventilated and there was a large communal area which enabled social distancing.” from the report
Further development identified
minorCQC signposted the provider to resources to develop its infection-control approach. The report does not specify a serious failure or say that this led to enforcement.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01When was the five-bed wing occupied, and how were the infection-control plans put into practice?
- 02How are staff kept separate from the main premises, and does the wing still have a dedicated staff team?
- 03How often are residents and staff tested, and what happens after a positive result?
- 04How is PPE supplied, checked and used by staff in the wing?
- 05What resources did CQC signpost the provider to, and what changes were made afterwards?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control in a five-bed wing that was empty at the time; the service was inspected but not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 April 2021 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, September 2018
Overall Outstanding; inspectors found exceptionally caring, person-centred support, with some shortfalls in staffing, cleanliness and records.
Inspectors visited on 18 and 23 July 2018. This was an unannounced first day followed by a planned second day. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals, observed care, and checked care files, medicines records, recruitment records and quality checks.
The home was rated Outstanding overall. Caring and well-led were Outstanding. Safe, effective and responsive were Good. Inspectors found kind and compassionate staff, detailed knowledge of people's needs, strong leadership and care planned around each person.
There were some areas to improve. Records for topical creams were incomplete in one house. Some bedrooms and corridors needed cleaning or refurbishment. There had also been short periods with fewer staff than planned, and some new staff had not completed their full induction.
Exceptional kindness
Staff treated people with warmth, dignity and compassion. They understood people's individual histories and went beyond routine duties to support wishes and maintain relationships.
“Staff offered care and support which is exceptionally caring and compassionate.” from the report
People understood as individuals
The home used detailed knowledge of people's communication, interests and past lives to provide meaningful support and recognise distress.
“The service was exceptional at helping people to express their views so that all staff understood their views, preferences, wishes and choices.” from the report
Strong leadership
Senior leaders were visible and worked alongside staff. Inspectors found a clear culture focused on people's quality of life and ongoing improvement.
“The management team established a strong, open and visible culture within the service.” from the report
Good food and drink support
People had varied meals, snacks and drinks, with support tailored to their dietary needs and preferences. Staff used pictorial menus and helped people remain as independent as possible.
“People's nutritional and hydration needs were being well met.” from the report
Topical medicine records
needs fixingIn one house, records showing when creams and other external preparations were applied had not been completed for three weeks. Inspectors made a recommendation for a consistent recording system.
“the paper records had not been completed for 3 weeks” from the report
Cleanliness and refurbishment
needs fixingSome bedrooms and corridors had unpleasant smells and had not been cleaned by mid-afternoon on the first inspection day. Some flooring, bedrooms and corridors also needed remedial work or refurbishment.
“some bedrooms upstairs which had a strong odour and had not been cleaned by mid-afternoon.” from the report
Staffing and induction
needs fixingThere were two days when sickness meant the home had fewer staff than its preferred number. Some newer staff on induction were used to help with staffing instead of being supernumerary, and some had not completed their full induction.
“newer staff who were on induction had been used to help with staffing shortfalls, instead of being supernumerary.” from the report
Family involvement in care plans
minorSome relatives said they had not been involved in care planning. The home had started work to improve how families were asked for information and feedback.
“Some relatives said they had not been involved in care planning.” from the report
- 01How are topical creams and other external medicines recorded now, and how do you check those records are complete?
- 02Have all bedrooms, corridors and flooring identified for cleaning or refurbishment now been dealt with?
- 03How do you cover staff sickness, and do new staff complete their full induction before being counted as part of the regular staffing?
- 04How will our family be involved in writing and reviewing the care plan?
- 05What end of life care training is currently available to staff following the cancelled hospice training?
This was a planned comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions; the previous March 2018 inspection was focused only on Safe and Well-led after a specific incident. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 September 2018 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk. The report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
Every inspection of Heanton Nursing Home
7 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has improved, from Good to Outstanding.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2018Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- May 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvement
- April 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2016Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvement
- September 2016Goodstayed GoodResponsive: Good
- May 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 February 2016.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Devon
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £1,020 to £1,270 a week. 15 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“She is such a warm and gentle person while being professional and competent at the same time.”
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.