CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Heathers
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staff were suitably recruited, risks were assessed, medicines were stored securely and infection control practices were safe, although some medicines records needed more detail.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a positive and open culture, effective checks and audits, and a clear management structure. This improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection.
What inspectors found, November 2023
The Heathers was rated Good; inspectors found people were safe and the home was well led, but some medicines records needed more detail.
This was an unannounced, focused inspection on 26 October 2023. One inspector spoke with two people, three staff members and managers. They also checked care plans, risk assessments and staff records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe was rated Good, and well-led was rated Good. Inspectors found enough suitable staff, safe recruitment, appropriate risk assessments and safe infection control. People could receive visitors without restrictions.
Some medicines records did not contain enough detail about how medicines were given. The registered manager said this would be corrected immediately after the inspection. The home had improved since the previous inspection, when well-led was rated Requires Improvement.
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led. The other areas were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were used when calculating the overall rating.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff knew how to recognise and report abuse.
“People told us they were safe. One person said, "Yes I feel safe here, no worries.” from the report
Risks were managed
The home assessed risks linked to the environment, eating and drinking, and distressed behaviour. Staff took action to reduce identified risks.
“The provider assessed risks to ensure people were safe. Staff took action to mitigate any identified risks.” from the report
Improved leadership
Checks and audits had improved since the previous inspection and were now effective. Managers acted promptly when improvements were needed.
“Improvements had been implemented and checks and audits in place were effective.” from the report
Medicines records needed more detail
needs fixingSome records did not fully describe the medicines administration process. The manager said extra detail, including body maps where needed, would be added immediately after the inspection.
“Some records we looked at required some extra detail, to ensure they fully reflected the medicines administration process.” from the report
- 01What extra detail has been added to the medicines records since the inspection?
- 02When are body maps used, and how do you check that they are completed correctly?
- 03How often are care plans, risk assessments and medicines records audited?
- 04What was the previous concern about care plan and risk assessment reviews, and how do your current checks prevent it happening again?
- 05How will you keep families informed if a medicine error or other incident occurs?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were used for the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 November 2023 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, November 2020
The Heathers was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control measures were in place.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 03 November 2020. It followed concerns about infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors found good practice. Staff used suitable PPE, visitors had health checks and protective measures, and people were supported to keep in touch with family and friends. The home also followed guidance when people returned from hospital or moved in.
Inspectors said they were assured about infection control, including cleaning, social distancing, testing and outbreak planning. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall rating or a full set of ratings for the five questions.
PPE and visitor checks
Staff used suitable PPE and visitors went through symptom and temperature checks, used hand sanitiser and wore PPE.
“Staff were observed to wear the correct Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) in line with government guidance.” from the report
Keeping families connected
People were supported to stay in contact with family and friends by phone, video calls and socially distanced visits.
“People were supported to maintain contact with family members and friends via phone, video calling and socially distanced out door visits.” from the report
Safe admissions and returns
The home followed government guidance when people returned from hospital or came back to the service, including self-isolation and testing.
“When people returned to the service or returned from hospital, government guidance was followed to support them self-isolate for the required period of time.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean, with more frequent cleaning of surfaces that people often touch.
“Cleaning schedules had been increased to ensure high touch surfaces were cleaned regularly.” from the report
Testing arrangements
minorTesting was taking place, but the report says improvements were planned to make the approach fit the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
“The service planned to implement improvements in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 for testing.” from the report
Infection control audits
minorAudits were being carried out, but the service had identified that its approach to these needed further improvement.
“Infection control audits were undertaken, the service planned improvements to these.” from the report
- 01What improvements have been made to testing in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005?
- 02What changes have been made to the infection control audit process?
- 03How would you support my relative if there was a COVID-19 outbreak?
- 04How can my relative keep in contact with family and friends under the current visiting arrangements?
- 05What procedures would you follow if my relative returned from hospital?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other questions were not assessed in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 November 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.
Every inspection of The Heathers
4 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- November 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 January 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
89 live-in carers within about an hour of North Northamptonshire
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 £1,260 a week. 76 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
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.