Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..

Care Services

carehome, nursing and medical services directory


Banbury Heights Nursing Home, Banbury.

Banbury Heights Nursing Home in Banbury is a Nursing home and Rehabilitation (illness/injury) specialising in the provision of services relating to accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care, caring for adults over 65 yrs, dementia, diagnostic and screening procedures, learning disabilities, mental health conditions, physical disabilities, sensory impairments and treatment of disease, disorder or injury. The last inspection date here was 22nd November 2019

Banbury Heights Nursing Home is managed by Banbury Heights Ltd.

Contact Details:

    Address:
      Banbury Heights Nursing Home
      11 Old Parr Road
      Banbury
      OX16 5HT
      United Kingdom
    Telephone:
      01295262083

Ratings:

For a guide to the ratings, click here.

Safe: Good
Effective: Good
Caring: Good
Responsive: Good
Well-Led: Good
Overall: Good

Further Details:

Important Dates:

    Last Inspection 2019-11-22
    Last Published 2017-08-19

Local Authority:

    Oxfordshire

Link to this page:

    HTML   BBCode

Inspection Reports:

Click the title bar on any of the report introductions below to read the full entry. If there is a PDF icon, click it to download the full report.

18th July 2017 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

We inspected this service on 18 July 2017. Banbury Heights Nursing Home provides personal or nursing care and accommodation for up to 59 people. On the day of our inspection 46 people were living at the service. This included 13 people staying in ‘hub’ beds, short term placements following a hospital discharge.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated good:

The provider had systems to monitor all aspects of the service delivery. Where an opportunity for improvement was identified this was being addressed. There was a drive for continuous development of the service. The team worked well with other professionals including local health and social care teams to ensure people’s needs were met.

People continued to be safe. Risk assessments were carried out and promoted positive risk taking to enable people to live their lives as they chose. People received their medicines safely.

People continued to receive support from staff that had the skills and knowledge to meet their needs. People were supported to have choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the procedures in the service supported this practice. People were supported to meet their nutritional needs and they complimented the food. Staff supported people to access health professionals and any advice received was followed in practice and reflected in people’s care plans.

People were supported by kind and compassionate staff that knew them well. The staff ensured people were reassured and given relevant information that appreciated people’s individual needs. People’s dignity, privacy, diversity and independence were respected and promoted. Staff used the information about people’s likes and preferences to create meaningful and memorable moments for them.

People’s care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed. People were involved in reviewing their care and received support that met their needs. People had opportunities to benefit from activities and social events.

Provider had a complaints policy that was available to people. People were able to give their views about the service in various ways such as via surveys, suggestions cards or meetings and the provider acted on feedback received.

30th July 2013 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

We visited Brooklands 2 to check what actions the provider had taken following our inspection in April 2013. At that inspection we found non-compliance with consent to care. We saw that this non-compliance had been addressed. During this visit we found an error in the registration of regulated activities that could lead people to believe the service was a Domicillary Care Agency (DCA). This is not the case.

We spoke with nine people who used the service. One person said "I am happy here. The staff are fantastic". Another said "the food is good, lots of choice". We spoke with a couple who had lived at the home. They said "this had been a Godsend for us. Of course we would rather be in our own home but they have looked after my wife and I so well I don't know what we would have done without them".

We spoke with four care workers and two nurses. One said "the people are great. I wouldn't do any other job. This is so rewarding We get lots of training which helps us to care for people professionally"

We looked at the records and saw that care staff were recruited and trained appropriately. Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks had been carried out and appropriate references obtained before care workers started work.

We saw that the provider audited and measured the quality of service. People’s views and comments were listened to and acted upon. We also saw that people nutrition needs were being monitored and met.

3rd April 2013 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

In some areas, including medicine administration and the use of bedrails, the service had robust systems in place to obtain and record consent. However, we found omissions in do not resuscitate decisions forms and that consent to share rooms had not been documented.

People we spoke with were complimentary of the staff and the service. One person said the service was “really good” and “I’m looked after, it’s alright”. Another person said “staff are good, they’re helping me to move back home”. We spoke with three friends and relatives. One relative told us they were happy with the care their loved one received and “that they could not fault the provider”.

People told us they enjoyed the food and felt there was always choice. We received the following comments "food is lovely", "there is a choice of food and if I don’t like it I can say”.

People we spoke with felt safe living in the home and said they would raise any concerns they had with senior staff within the home.

There were enough suitably qualified staff to meet peoples’ needs. Staff and people and relatives we spoke with said there were enough staff on duty; “there seems to be lots of staff”.

The service had a robust auditing plan and risk assessment process. We saw records of actions being taken and improvements being implemented as a result. People who used the service had their views sought and acted upon. One person we spoke with said “If anything’s wrong, they’ll put it right”.

9th October 2012 - During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made pdf icon

We used a variety of methods to inspect this service. We were not able to speak to people who used this service but we heard from external agencies and we talked to nursing staff and managers. We examined record keeping and audits which had been carried out internally and externally. We saw records of peoples' current medicines and their medication history so that staff knew what medicines were prescribed. No medicines were out of stock and records showed that they were being given as prescribed. We walked around the home and we noticed no medicines being kept insecurely.

27th June 2012 - During an inspection in response to concerns pdf icon

We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using this service. We observed the care being provided and spoke with staff.

25th October 2011 - During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made pdf icon

People told us that it was a good home, staff were respectful and kind.

7th July 2011 - During an inspection in response to concerns pdf icon

We spoke to 13 people at the home. Comments were generally favourable about the qualities of the staff, although two people told us they were kept waiting for a long time after they had rung their bell for assistance. People told us that staff were friendly and kind. One person commented that sometimes they did not understand what staff were saying. People told us that the accommodation was comfortable and generally the home was clean. People said that the quality of food provided varied from day to day but was in general satisfactory.

1st January 1970 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

We inspected Banbury Heights Nursing Home on 20 and 21 May 2015. Banbury Heights provides nursing care for people over the age of 65. Some people at the home were living with dementia. The home offers a service for up to 56 people. At the time of our visit 46 people were using the service. This was an unannounced inspection.

We last inspected in June 2013 and found the service was meeting all of the required standards.

There was a registered manager at the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People were cared for by caring, kind and compassionate staff. Care and nursing staff took time to talk with people, reassure them and support them when they needed it.

People were supported to follow their interests. There were a range of activities available for people. People's preferences were clearly documented and respected. Staff knew the people they cared for, and spoke positively about providing personalised care to people.

People were free to move around the home as they pleased and access the home’s garden. People and relatives spoke positively about the environment and the activities available to people within the home

Nursing and care staff were supported and encouraged to develop professionally by the registered manager and provider. Staff were able to talk about their needs and were able to suggest improvements to the service.

Nursing and care staff had good awareness of safeguarding and whistle blowing procedures. People told us they felt safe and relatives spoke positively about the way their loved ones were cared for.

Staff understood and acted in accordance with the legal requirements when supporting people who lacked capacity to give consent to care and treatment.

Where medicines were administered from monitored dosage systems people received their prescribed medicines as expected.

There were enough nursing, care and domestic staff to meet the needs of people in the home. When people needed help staff were quick to assist them.

The registered manager encouraged involvement of nursing and care staff in projects around health and social care. The registered manager attended social care conferences to gain knowledge to develop the quality of service people received.

The registered manager had strong systems in place to ensure people received a good quality service. People's views were sought regularly and these views were acted upon. People, their relatives and staff were given the information they needed around changes to the service.

 

 

Latest Additions: