CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Heathfield Gardens
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was following safe infection prevention and control procedures. They were assured about visitors, social distancing, protective equipment, testing, hygiene and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control arrangements were safe, with some guidance given to develop the approach.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 12 November 2020. Inspectors checked infection prevention and control because of coronavirus outbreaks in care homes.
Inspectors found that access was restricted, visitors were checked, staff and residents had testing, and there were enough supplies of protective equipment. People were supported to keep in touch with family and friends using technology.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or full ratings for all five areas of care.
Restricted access
Entry to the home was restricted, and people entering had their temperature checked before leaving reception. This was intended to reduce the spread of infection.
“Access to the home was restricted. No visitors, other than healthcare professionals were allowed in the home.” from the report
Keeping families connected
Staff supported people to stay in contact with family and friends through technology such as Zoom. Plans were also made for safe garden visits when infection risk reduced.
“Staff supported people to maintain contact with family and friends. This has included the use of technology, such as Zoom meetings” from the report
Accessible information
Easy-read information was used to explain social distancing and protective equipment to people with a learning disability.
“'Easy-read' documentation had been used to explain to people with a learning disability about the importance of social distancing” from the report
Protective equipment and testing
Inspectors found adequate supplies of protective equipment, with stock levels checked regularly. Staff were tested weekly and residents were tested when required.
“There were adequate supplies of PPE and stock levels were regularly checked.” from the report
Infection control systems
Inspectors were assured about the home's arrangements for preventing and managing infection outbreaks, including its policy and hygiene practices.
“We were assured that the provider's infection prevention and control policy was up to date.” from the report
Approach to be developed
minorInspectors signposted the home to resources to develop its infection control approach. The report does not explain what specific improvement was needed.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What infection control approach did inspectors suggest developing further?
- 02How are visitors currently managed, and when can families meet residents in person?
- 03How often are staff and residents tested now?
- 04How do you explain infection control rules in an accessible way to people with learning disabilities?
- 05What arrangements are in place if there is an infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and Safe was inspected but not rated; the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 December 2020 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, June 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some staffing and management arrangements still being developed.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 10 May 2018. One inspector spoke with people, relatives, managers and staff. They observed care and reviewed care records, staff recruitment files and the provider's quality checks.
The home supported 10 people with learning disabilities and associated conditions. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines systems, suitable risk assessments and good infection control. People were supported to make choices, stay independent and access health care.
Inspectors saw caring relationships and support that respected privacy, dignity and communication needs. People had personalised activities, community opportunities and support to maintain important relationships. Complaints were recorded and addressed.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the first inspection since the provider registered this location in October 2016.
Safe medicines
Inspectors found systems for receiving, storing, giving and disposing of medicines. Records and stock checks supported that medicines were given as prescribed.
“Medicine administration records were audited to check that people had taken their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Personalised communication
The home used pictures, signs, gestures and communication books to help people express their wishes and make everyday choices.
“Communication plans were in place within people's support files that provided detailed information on how people communicated their needs and preferences.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed positive relationships. Staff supported people with dignity, respected private time and helped them stay connected with people who mattered to them.
“We saw a positive and caring approach was provided by the staff team that enabled people to live a fulfilling life.” from the report
Activities and community life
People were supported with meaningful activities, local community involvement, holidays and employment opportunities suited to their interests and abilities.
“The manager and staff team ensured people's social inclusion by promoting purposeful recreational and social opportunities.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The provider had audits, feedback and a development plan. This gave the manager and provider a way to track improvements and outstanding actions.
“Systems were in place to assess and monitor the service and support provided to people.” from the report
Manager registration
minorThere was no registered manager in post at the inspection. The manager had applied to register, but the process was not complete.
“The service did not have a registered manager in post.” from the report
Staff vacancies
needs fixingThere were staff vacancies and recruitment was continuing. Inspectors found enough staff during the visit and said people's needs continued to be met, but families should check the current staffing position.
“The manager confirmed that there were some staff vacancies that were being recruited to at the time of the inspection.” from the report
- 01Is the manager now registered with CQC, and who is responsible for the home if registration is still pending?
- 02Have all staff vacancies been filled, and how do you ensure there are enough familiar staff on each shift?
- 03Have the remaining applications to lawfully restrict people's liberty now been approved?
- 04How are people involved in choosing their key worker and reviewing their support plans?
- 05Have the planned Makaton, dementia and end of life care training programmes been completed?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five ratings and the overall quality of the home; it was the first inspection since the location was registered in October 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 June 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.
Every inspection of Heathfield Gardens
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2018GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 October 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
62 live-in carers within about an hour of Derbyshire
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 £1,010 to £1,260 a week. 51 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
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.