CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Heather View
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Risks were assessed and managed, recruitment checks were completed and call bells were answered promptly. Most people felt there were enough staff, although some people raised concerns about staff numbers when someone was off sick.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff received training, supervision and checks of their practice. People's nutritional, healthcare, mobility and consent needs were assessed and supported.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff involved people in care decisions and promoted independence where possible.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and reviewed regularly. People had access to activities, communication support, religious support and appropriate end of life care.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team was described as open, approachable and supportive. Audits, meetings, feedback and incident reviews were used to monitor the service and make improvements.
What inspectors found, May 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, safe medicines and strong management, with some mixed views about staffing levels.
This was an unannounced inspection on 19 March 2019. Two inspectors and two experts by experience spoke with people, relatives and staff. They reviewed care records, risk assessments, medicines records, complaints, incidents and quality checks. They also observed activities and mealtimes.
The inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and involved in decisions about their care. Staff understood people's needs and preferences. Medicines were given safely. People had enough food and drink, access to healthcare and a varied programme of activities.
The home had a clear management structure and systems to monitor quality and risks. All five areas were rated Good. This means the inspectors found the service met the relevant legal requirements and that people's outcomes were consistently good.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about the care. Staff knew people well and supported their dignity, choices and independence.
“People were treated with dignity and compassion by a kind, caring staff and management team who understood people's individual needs, choices and preferences well.” from the report
Safe medicines
Nurses were trained and checked as competent to give medicines. Inspectors observed medicines being given on time and as prescribed, including medicines needed only when required.
“People received their medicines safely including; medicines that were prescribed on an 'as and when required' basis.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's histories, preferences and needs. Staff used this information to provide individual care and meaningful activities.
“Care plans were detailed, and person centred enabling staff to support people in a personalised way.” from the report
Food and healthcare
People had regular access to healthcare and specialist support. Dietary needs, allergies and swallowing difficulties were identified and catered for.
“Specialist diets were catered for.” from the report
Activities and social life
People had a broad choice of activities, including music, exercise, crafts, visiting animals and contact with a local playgroup.
“People had access to meaning full occupation and stimulation and there was a varied programme of activities.” from the report
Open management
The management team used meetings, audits, feedback and reviews of incidents to oversee quality and reduce risks.
“There were systems and processes for quality monitoring and auditing, ensuring good governance of the service and to drive improvement.” from the report
Staffing during sickness
minorMost people said staffing was enough, and inspectors observed timely care. However, some people felt the home would benefit from more staff, particularly when someone called in sick.
“One person told us that there were enough staff but they were always rushing around” from the report
Waiting after knocking
minorPeople generally said staff knocked before entering. One person said staff did not always wait for a response, so this is worth discussing if privacy is important to your relative.
“One person said that staff knock on their door but do not always wait for a response.” from the report
- 01How many staff are normally on duty for each unit and shift, and what happens when someone calls in sick?
- 02How will you assess and review my relative's mobility, falls risks and need for equipment?
- 03How will you support my relative's diet, allergies, swallowing needs or other nutritional requirements?
- 04What activities would suit my relative's interests, communication needs and level of mobility?
- 05How will you make sure staff respect my relative's privacy by waiting for permission before entering their room?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the premises; the previous overall rating was Good, published on 21 September 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 May 2019 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 2016
Rated Good overall, with Outstanding caring; inspectors found safe, respectful care and improvements since the last inspection.
Inspectors visited the home without warning on 26 and 28 July 2016. They spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and other professionals. They reviewed care and medicine records, staff files, safety checks, activities and complaints.
The home was rated Good overall. It was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led care. Caring was rated Outstanding. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, person-centred care plans, suitable food, prompt healthcare referrals and a wide range of activities.
Inspectors also found that problems identified at the July 2015 inspection had been addressed. Improvements had been made to laundry, care planning and meaningful activities.
Kind and respectful staff
Staff built strong relationships with people and treated them with kindness, patience and respect. They noticed non-verbal signs of distress and adapted their support.
“They had built a positive rapport with people that promoted friendship and respect.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Staffing levels were reviewed against people's needs, with extra staff added when necessary. Inspectors found medicines were stored, given, recorded and checked safely.
“All aspects of people's medicines were managed safely.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's histories, likes, dislikes, routines and communication needs. Staff followed these plans and involved people and families in reviews.
“People's care was personalised to reflect their wishes and what was important to them.” from the report
Improved activities
The home had acted on the previous concern about activities. Inspectors found varied activities, outings and individual sessions suited to people's interests and abilities.
“A wide range of daily activities that were suitable for older people and people who lived with dementia was available.” from the report
Some training was not up to date
minorThe report says that, on average, 90% of staff were up to date with training. Ask which training was outstanding and how quickly it was completed.
“On average, 90% of staff were up to date with their training.” from the report
Dementia-friendly signs were still being developed
minorThere were no pictorial signs in the corridors to help people find the lounges and dining room. The home said a plan was in progress to improve signage and other visual information.
“However there were no pictorial signs in corridors to help people find the lounges and dining room.” from the report
- 01Which staff training was not up to date at the inspection, and is all required training now complete?
- 02Have pictorial signs been added to the corridors to help people living with dementia find the lounges and dining room?
- 03How are staffing levels adjusted when people's needs change or when extra one-to-one support is needed?
- 04How will my relative's personal interests, routines, food preferences and communication needs be recorded and reviewed?
- 05How can relatives take part in care plan reviews and raise concerns with a senior manager?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, covering all five CQC questions and checking improvements identified at the July 2015 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 September 2016 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 Heather View
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- May 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2015Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2014Inspected but not rated
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 28 July 2011.
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
19 live-in carers within about an hour of East Sussex
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 £1,000 to £1,400 a week. 13 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“When he point blank refused to go into hospital for a life saving blood transfusion she talked him through the situation and agreed to go in the ambulance with him and stayed until he was settled.”
“Una felt safe, secure and loved in her time with Debbie which is a gift that I am eternally grateful for.”
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.