CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Heathfield House Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management and up-to-date risk assessments. People said they felt safe, and staff knew how to report safeguarding concerns.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training, supervision and support. People received suitable food and drink, and staff worked with healthcare professionals to support their health.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were described and observed as kind, compassionate and respectful. People were involved in decisions and supported to remain independent.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans included people's histories, preferences and changing needs. People had access to activities, information in suitable formats and a complaints process.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open, positive culture and systems for checking quality. The home used meetings and audits to identify improvements.
What inspectors found, July 2018
Rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with significant improvements since the previous inspection.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 12 July 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff, managers and a healthcare professional. They reviewed care plans, staff files, medicine records and other records.
The home was rated Good overall, and Good for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, suitable training, kind care, personalised support and systems to monitor quality.
At the previous inspection in June 2017, medicines records and risk management had not always been accurate or up to date. This inspection found significant improvements, including accurate medicine and risk records.
Medicines and risk management
The previous inspection found problems with medicines and risk records. Inspectors found significant improvements, with medicines given as prescribed and records accurate and complete.
“People received their medicine as prescribed. Medicines were managed safely and records relating to the administration of medicines were accurate and complete.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with dignity and compassion. Staff knew people well and gave emotional support as well as practical care.
“Throughout the inspection we observed staff treating people with dignity, respect and compassion.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records included people's preferences, interests, histories and communication needs. Staff adapted support when people's needs changed.
“Care records contained details of people's personal histories, likes, dislikes and preferences and included people's preferred names, interests, hobbies and religious needs.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels were sufficient and staff were not rushed. Staff had time to spend talking with people.
“There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs. Staff were not rushed in their duties and had time to sit and chat with people.” from the report
Quality improvement
The manager used audits, meetings and feedback to make changes. Examples included refresher training, improved menu information and changes to parking and telephone systems.
“The registered manager monitored the quality of service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you make sure medicines continue to be given as prescribed and records remain accurate?
- 02How are my relative's risks assessed and reviewed if their condition changes?
- 03What training and supervision will the staff supporting my relative have?
- 04How will you tailor activities, communication and personal care to my relative's preferences?
- 05How can I raise a complaint or concern, and how will you keep me informed of the outcome?
This was an unannounced inspection covering the overall service and all five CQC questions, including care, nursing, premises and records. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 July 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.
What inspectors found, June 2017
Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, personalised care, but medicines, risk plans and monitoring were not always reliable.
This was an unannounced inspection on 1 June 2017. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and managers. They reviewed care records, staff files, medicine records and records about how the home was managed. They also observed care.
The home was rated Good for effective, caring and responsive care. Staff were described as kind, knowledgeable and respectful. There were enough staff, people received personalised care, and relatives said they were listened to.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for safe and well-led care. Inspectors found that medicines records were not always accurate, one person did not have a falls risk plan, and quality checks had not found these problems. The registered manager took immediate action during or after the inspection to address several concerns.
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with warmth, compassion and dignity. Inspectors saw staff listening to people, respecting their choices and supporting their independence.
“Staff were very kind, compassionate and respectful and treated people and their relatives with dignity and respect.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's histories, preferences and support needs. Staff knew people well and adapted care as their needs changed.
“People received high quality care that was personalised and met their needs.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff were not rushed and responded promptly when people asked for help.
“There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs. Staff responded promptly where people required assistance.” from the report
Missing falls risk plan
seriousOne person was at high risk of falling and had experienced a fall and a near miss, but did not have a falls risk management plan. The manager put a plan in place during the visit.
“One person was at risk of falls but had no risk management plan to manage the risk.” from the report
Checks did not find problems
needs fixingThe home's audits did not identify concerns about risk plans and care plan reviews. Some accident and incident records also did not clearly show what had been done to reduce further risks.
“Audits had failed to identify our concerns relating to risk management plans being followed.” from the report
Records were not always complete
needs fixingSome records about risks, care plans and accidents were not accurate, complete or up to date. The manager said these records would be reviewed and later sent evidence of follow-up actions.
“Records relating to incidents and accidents were not always complete.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that medicines and prescribed thickened drinks are given and recorded accurately?
- 02What process ensures every person with a falls risk has a current risk management plan?
- 03How are care plan audits checked to make sure they identify missing or outdated information?
- 04When someone falls or has another incident, how do you record and monitor the action taken to reduce the risk of it happening again?
- 05What activities and one-to-one support are available for people who do not join group activities?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, with the overall rating and ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led assessed on 1 June 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 June 2017 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 House Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2018Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Heathfield House Nursing Home →
- June 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Heathfield House Nursing Home →
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 November 2010.
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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Oxfordshire
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 £980 to £1,300 a week. 32 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
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.