Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..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


Heathcotes (Blackburn), Florence Street, Blackburn.

Heathcotes (Blackburn) in Florence Street, Blackburn is a Residential home specialising in the provision of services relating to accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care, learning disabilities, mental health conditions, physical disabilities and sensory impairments. The last inspection date here was 14th September 2018

Heathcotes (Blackburn) is managed by Heathcotes Care Limited who are also responsible for 61 other locations

Contact Details:

    Address:
      Heathcotes (Blackburn)
      Florence House
      Florence Street
      Blackburn
      BB1 5JP
      United Kingdom
    Telephone:
      0
    Website:

Ratings:

For a guide to the ratings, click here.

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

Further Details:

Important Dates:

    Last Inspection 2018-09-14
    Last Published 2018-09-14

Local Authority:

    Blackburn with Darwen

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.

21st August 2018 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

This inspection took place on 21 and 22 August 2018 and was unannounced.

Heathcotes (Blackburn) is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The values of the service reflected those that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These included choice, independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities using the service could live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

Heathcotes (Blackburn) is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for 13 people. On the day of our inspection there were 12 people residing in the service who were living with a learning disability and/or mental health diagnosis and complex needs.

The service had a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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.

We undertook a comprehensive inspection of Heathcotes (Blackburn) on the 6 and 7 June 2017. The overall rating from this inspection was ‘Requires Improvement’, with ‘Good’ in responsive. There were three breaches of the Regulations in relation to unsafe management of medicines, lack of induction, training and supervisions for staff and the provider had not notified the Commission of incidents which affected the safety of people using the service. We also made recommendations about infection control and quality assurance audits.

Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key question(s), is the service safe, is the service effective and is the service well led? During this inspection we found the necessary improvements had been made and the overall rating has therefore improved to Good.

Risk assessments were in place to keep people safe. We saw individual risk assessments were in place in relation to people’s health care needs. We also saw risks in the environment had been considered to ensure the safety of people who used the service, staff and visitors.

Medicines were managed safely. Staff had received training in administering medicines and their competencies were checked regularly. We found medicines were stored safely, the medicine administration records were completed without any gaps and controlled drugs were safely stored.

Recruitment systems and processes in place were robust. We saw references, identity checks and Disclosure and Barring Service checks were completed before staff were employed. People who used the service told us and records we looked at showed adequate numbers of staff were on duty.

We have made a recommendation in relation to the cleanliness of the service.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

All new staff members were expected to complete an induction when they commenced employment. Training courses were available to staff which were relevant to their roles. Staff members told us and records confirmed that staff members received supervisions and appraisals on a regular basis. All staff members told us they were able to discuss any training requirements they had.

During our inspection we noted an incident which we felt required bringing to the attention of the registered manager. This was around the lack of communication between one staff member and a person who was visually impaired when mobilising around the service. However, we also observed lots of positive interactions where staff displayed a caring attitude and kind

6th June 2017 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

We carried out this inspection on the 6 and 7 June 2017. The first day of our inspection was unannounced. We last inspected this service on 12 May 2015 when we rated the service as Good.

Heathcotes (Blackburn) is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for 13 people. On the day of our inspection there were 13 people residing in the service who were living with a learning disability and/or mental health diagnosis and complex needs.

At the time of our inspection the service did not have a registered manager in post. 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. The previous registered manager had been promoted within the company and a new manager had been put in place on 30 March 2017. The new manager had submitted their application to register with us and their fit person’s interview was planned for 22 June 2017.

During this inspection three breaches of the regulations were found. These were in relation to the unsafe management of medicines, lack of adequate staff training and supervisions and failure to submit relevant notifications. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of this report. We also made recommendations about infection control and quality assurance audits.

We reviewed medicines management within the service and found this was not always safe. Records we looked at showed staff members had been signing for medicines prior to administering them to the person. We also found that a prescribed ‘thickener’ was out of stock and had been out of stock the previous month. On the morning of our inspection a staff member had signed to confirm the thickener had been administered despite this being out of stock. Prior to our inspection we received information of concern in relation to the over use of as required medicines. We checked this during our inspection and found no cause for concern.

Risk assessments were in place to keep people safe. We saw risk assessments in place in relation to medicines, moving and handling, travelling in a car and accessing the kitchen. We found one risk assessment had not been put in place in relation to a person choking; however the manager sent this to us the day after our inspection.

Prior to our inspection we received information of concern in relation to the low staffing levels at the service. We checked this during our inspection and found some gaps in the rota where staffing had not been arranged. However, we spoke with the manager who informed us that new staff members were awaiting a start date and themselves and the deputy manager made up the numbers if they were required to do so. We were reassured by this.

There were systems and processes in place to keep people safe in the event of an emergency such as fire. Regular fire drills were held, people had personal emergency evacuation plans (PEEP’s) in place, firefighting equipment was serviced regularly and gas and electrical items were checked.

Prior to our inspection we received information of concern in relation to the heating and hot water in the service. We were informed that the service had been without heating and hot water for two weeks. We checked this during our inspection and found there had been some minor issues with the new boiler which had been addressed. The service had not been without heating or water for any significant length of time.

On the first day of our inspection we noted some bathrooms did not have paper towels or hand wash in them. We mentioned this to the manager who informed us they had requested a staff member went out to purchase some. On the second day of our inspection we still found one bathroom without hand wash. We have made a recommendation that the service consider

2nd April 2014 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

On the day of the inspection we spoke with three people who used the service, four staff members and a family member.

Was the service safe?

Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learn from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns, whistleblowing and investigations. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve. The home had proper policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards although no applications were currently required. Relevant staff had been trained to understand when an application should be made, and how to submit one. Staff told us they would react to any safeguarding incidents and the people who used the service said they did not feel threatened by staff. This meant that people were safeguarded as required.

The service was safe, clean and hygienic. Equipment was well maintained and serviced regularly therefore not putting people at unnecessary risk. A visitor said, "They look after the building very well and have improved the home in many ways. He was able to have his room decorated the way he wanted it".

The registered manager sets the staff rotas, they take people’s care needs into account when making decisions about the numbers, qualifications, skills and experience required. This helps to ensure that people’s needs are always met. Staff members told us, "In general there are enough staff and we meet people’s needs to the best of our ability", "As a rule there are enough staff to meet the needs of people here. We have one to one care for all service users and sometimes there are two to one if we go away" and "I do not think there are enough staff here sometimes because of staff sickness. There would be plenty if they all turned in".

Was the service effective?

People’s health and care needs were assessed with them if possible, and they were involved in writing their plans of care. Specialist dietary, mobility and equipment needs had been identified in care plans where required. People said that they had been involved in writing them and they reflected their current needs. People who used the service told us, "I get good care here. Staff are very nice. We have a new staff member and she is very nice. I am not afraid of anyone, they are all kind" and "Staff look after me very well but let me do lots for myself. Staff do not bully me. It is my home and I am very happy with it".

People’s needs were taken into account with signage and the layout of the service enabling people to move around freely and safely. The premises had been sensitively adapted to meet the needs of people with physical impairments.

Visitors confirmed that they were able to see people in private and that visiting times were flexible.

Was the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that care workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people. All three people we spoke with said staff were kind. A relative said, "He gets one to one care but they do not follow him around so he feels independent. I have always found that their behaviour is appropriate and have not seen any abuse. They know him very well and can help prevent any potential mental health problems. His health is good because they prevent any problems in the way they care for him. Staff have a positive mental attitude". People using the service were able to voice their opinion in the way the service was run at meetings and their relatives, friends and other professionals involved with the service completed an annual satisfaction survey. Where shortfalls or concerns were raised these were addressed.

People’s preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people’s wishes. People who used the service were encouraged to fill in parts of the plans of care to give staff sufficient information to treat them as individuals.

Was the service responsive?

People completed a range of activities in and outside the service regularly. Some people had access to their own transport or were escorted in staff cars. Activities included holidays as well as going to venues such as places of interest, shopping, eating out and social clubs. On the day of the inspection several people were out. Two people had gone to the sea life centre, one for a meal with his relative and one person shopping.

All three people said they were happy living at the home and had no concerns. A family member told us she was in daily contact with her son but staff could be contacted at any time.

Was the service well-led?

The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care in a joined up way.

The service had a good quality assurance system. Records seen by us showed that identified shortfalls were addressed promptly and as a result the quality of the service was continuingly improving.

Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and quality assurance processes were in place. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service at all times. Three staff members told us, "I like working here. Management are supportive", "I am happy working here. It’s a good place to work" and "I love my job. We have understanding management who listen and we can communicate with them. The manager is always easy to approach".

10th April 2013 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

Two people we spoke with said, "I have a nice room. I like to keep it clean myself. I have some new furniture which I have chosen myself. I am having it decorated how I want" and "I have a nice room and have just got some new furniture which I chose myself". People who used the service lived in a homely environment and were satisfied with their surroundings.

People who used the service said, "I make a lot of my own food. I can choose what I want to eat and I am going to eat out tonight" and "I can cook and I help in the kitchen. We get very good food here. We can choose what we want". People who used the service were supported to be involved in their diets and therefore enjoyed what they ate.

Plans of care contained the wishes of people in many aspects of their lives to enable staff to deliver person centred care.

People were asked their views about how they wished the care home to progress. People told us, "I like it here. It is special" and "I am happy here. You can choose what you want to do so I am happy".

17th April 2012 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

People who used the service told us they were happy living at the home. One person said "It was special".

People told us they "Felt safe".

People said they were kept occupied by "Art work", "Helping in the kitchen" or by "Going shopping".

People said they had "Nice rooms" for their private time.

People said the food was good and they had a choice at mealtimes.

People told us that staff were nice and looked after their needs.

1st January 1970 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

The service is registered to provide personal care for 13 people who have a learning disability. On the day of the inspection 12 people resided within the home.

We last inspected this service in April 2014 when the service met all the standards we inspected.

The service had a registered manager. 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 a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. However, the registered manager had taken maternity leave. There was an experienced person in charge.

People who used the service told us they felt safe at this care home. Staff were trained in the protection of vulnerable adults and had policies and procedures to refer to.

We looked at staff files and the training matrix. We found staff were robustly recruited, trained in topics relevant to the service and were in sufficient numbers to meet people’s needs.

There were systems in place to prevent the spread of infection.

People told us the food served at the home was good and they were involved in planning menus, cooking and shopping.

We found the administration of medication was safe.

Some staff had completed training in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) so they should know when an application needs to be made and how to submit one.

Electrical and gas equipment was serviced and maintained. However, five bedrooms did not have a hot water supply to the sinks on the day of the inspection. The manager telephoned a plumber but they had not been by the end of the inspection.

There were individual risk assessments to keep people safe but they did not restrict people who used the service to access the community.

We toured the building and found the home to be warm, clean and fresh smelling. Several rooms had been redecorated in a homely style and people who used the service had personalised their rooms to their tastes.

Plans of care were individual to each person and had been regularly reviewed to keep staff up to date with any changes to people’s needs.

People who used the service were able to join in meaningful activities and regularly went out into the community.

We observed that staff were caring and protected people’s privacy and dignity when they gave personal care.

Policies and procedures were updated and management audits helped managers check on the quality of the service.

People who used the service were able to voice their opinions and tell staff what they wanted in meetings, with their key workers and by completing surveys. People who used the service were also able to raise any concerns if they wished.

We saw the manager analysed incidents, accidents and compliments to improve the service or minimise risks.

 

 

Latest Additions: