Attention: The information on this website is currently out of date and should not be relied upon..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


Heathlands Care Home, London.

Heathlands Care Home in London is a Nursing home specialising in the provision of services relating to accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care, caring for adults over 65 yrs, dementia, mental health conditions and treatment of disease, disorder or injury. The last inspection date here was 12th September 2018

Heathlands Care Home is managed by Heathlands Care Home (Chingford) Ltd.

Contact Details:

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 2018-09-12
    Last Published 2018-09-12

Local Authority:

    Waltham Forest

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.

31st July 2018 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

We last inspected this service in September 2016 where it was rated ‘good’ overall. This inspection took place on July 31 2018 and was unannounced.

Heathlands is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Heathlands Care Home is a nursing home that provides care for up to 84 people. At the time of our inspection there were 83 people using the service.

The service had a peripatetic manager in place at the time of our inspection. They were awaiting the outcome of their application to become the registered manager of 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.

The service was safe and people were protected from harm. Care workers were knowledgeable about safeguarding adults from abuse and knew what to do if they had any concerns and how to report them. Safeguarding training was given to all staff.

Risk assessments were thorough and personalised. Care workers knew what to do in an emergency situation.

Staffing levels were meeting the needs of the people who used the service and care workers demonstrated they had the relevant knowledge to support people with their care.

Recruitment practices were safe and records confirmed this.

Medicines were managed and administered safely and audited on a weekly basis.

Newly recruited care workers received an induction. Training was provided on a regular basis and updated when relevant.

Care workers demonstrated an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and how they obtained consent on a daily basis. Consent was recorded in people's care plans.

People were supported with maintaining a balanced diet and the people who used the service chose their meals and these were provided in line with their preferences.

People were supported to have access to healthcare services and receive on-going support. Referrals to healthcare professionals were made appropriately and a multi-disciplinary approach was adopted to support people.

Positive relationships were formed between care workers and the people who used the service and staff demonstrated how they knew the people they cared for well. People who used the service and their relatives told us care workers were caring and treated them with respect.

Care plans were detailed and contained relevant information about people who used the service and their needs such as their preferences and communication needs.

Concerns and complaints were listened to and records confirmed this.

People who used the service, their relatives and support workers spoke highly of the peripatetic manager and told us they felt supported by him.

Quality assurance practices were robust and taking place regularly.

27th September 2016 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

Heathlands Care Home is a nursing home that provides care for up to 84 people. At the time of our inspection there were 77 people using the service.

The service had an acting manager who had been in place for three months at the time of our inspection. They were currently awaiting the outcome of their application to become the registered manager of 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.

The service was safe and people using the service communicated this to us. Staff demonstrated their knowledge in safeguarding adults and what action to take should they have any concerns. The service reported any accidents and incidents as well as safeguarding's to the relevant local authority and to the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

The service had robust risk assessments in place and people using the service were protected from harm where risks were identified. Risk assessments were thorough and contained clear mitigation plans.

Staffing levels were adequate for the level of need across the units and staff told us that any absences were covered. Staff were recruited safely and in line with relevant pre-employment checks.

People’s medicines were managed, stored and administered safely and audits were completed to ensure consistency.

The service was effective and we saw that people received care based on best practice from staff who had the knowledge and skills through training and supervision to carry out their roles and responsibilities. Staff told us they were supported in their roles.

Consent to care and treatment was sought and we observed examples of this. Staff had an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The service monitored how consent was obtained and this was recorded accordingly.

People were supported to have sufficient amounts to eat and drink and maintain a balanced diet. People told us they enjoyed the food and that it was varied. People told us they had a choice of food and that they were made alternative meals if they didn’t fancy what was on the menu. Dietary needs were adhered to and monitored where relevant.

People were supported to maintain good health and have access to on-going healthcare support. Referrals to healthcare professionals were prompt and records of people’s health needs were documented. The service had a good working relationship with the local CCG who provided on-going support to people using the service and management.

The service was caring and we observed positive caring relationships with staff and people using the service. People told us they were happy with their care. People were supported to express their views and be involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support. People were given choice and independence was promoted. People’s privacy and dignity was respected. People who were at the end of their lives and receiving palliative care were cared for in a dignified manner and had specific care plans in place.

The service was responsive and care planning was thorough and detailed. People’s preferences, wishes and aspirations were identified and people were supported to follow their interests. Care plans were reviewed on a regular basis and changes were recorded accordingly.

Concerns and complaints were encouraged and responded to and people knew how to complain and share their experiences. Families were encouraged to provide feedback and relatives meetings were a regular occurrence. Management acted on the information they received about the quality of care provided and concerns and complaints were used as an opportunity to make improvements.

The service was well led and management promoted a positi

2nd December 2013 - During an inspection in response to concerns pdf icon

We saw appropriate arrangements were in place for recording the administration of medicines. These records were clear and fully completed. The records showed people were getting their medicines when they needed them.

10th October 2013 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

Relatives we spoke with were complimentary about the service. One stated that the service was “very nice”. Another commented “it’s like walking into a hotel”. Staff were described as “approachable” and “compassionate”.

Files showed that people’s needs were assessed prior to placement at the home. The assessment covered life history, medical history, psychological and emotional behaviour, mobility and body mapping.

People were not supported in promoting their independence and community involvement. We saw the home had an activities programme in place. However there was no evidence that these activities took place.

People’s health, safety and welfare was protected when more than one provider was involved in their care and treatment, or when they moved between different services. This was because the provider worked in co-operation with others.

People's bedrooms were personalised to suit taste and some people had furnished their rooms with personal items and photographs. People told us that they liked living in the home. One person said “I like it because I have my own front door”.

Staff received appropriate professional development. Staff told us they have annual appraisal where they discuss their performance and any training they may need or want.

People’s personal records including medical records were not accurate and fit for purpose. We found documentation relating to peoples care and support needs did not contain the most up to date information.

6th February 2013 - During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made pdf icon

We spoke to people who used the service about their medication and we were told that the nurse gave the medicines to them when they needed it. People we spoke with said they had never been forced to take any medicine against their wishes.

We observed the medication administration round after lunch and saw that each person was supported individually to take their medication with a drink, which was provided where appropriate. Consent was sort by the nurse in charge before administering the person their medicine.

30th August 2012 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

Everyone we spoke with was very positive about the service and said staff were “Wonderful” and “Excellent”. People who used the service and their relatives said "Everything is clean and comfortable", "Staff are always polite and happy" and "We couldn't ask for better". Although everyone was happy with the care provided two people we spoke with felt more opportunities for social interactions would be beneficial.

We were told that staff worked well with visiting health care professionals who felt staff were well trained and took an active part in the assessment and planning of care and treatment for people who used services.

We were told by one health care professional they felt the care given to people with dementia care needs and the palliative care was excellent.

1st January 1970 - During a routine inspection pdf icon

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

At the previous inspection of this service in October 2013 we found areas of non-compliance which we found had been met during the course of this inspection. The areas of previous non-compliance included Regulation 17 Respecting and involving people who use services, Regulation 9 Care and welfare of people who use services and Regulation 20 Records. This inspection was unannounced.

Heathlands Care Centre provides accommodation for up to 84 older people who have dementia care needs. The home is located in a residential area and accommodation was on three floors. The home had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and shares the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law with the provider.

People told us they were happy with the care and support provided. We found that systems were in place to help ensure people were safe. For example, staff had a good understanding of issues related to safeguarding vulnerable adults. People knew the procedures for reporting any concerns and had confidence the manager would respond appropriately to any concerns raised.

Systems and processes were in place to protect people from foreseeable harm, and act on concerns in order to keep people safe. CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes and hospitals. We found there were nine DoLS authorisations in place and staff had received training on DoLS. The manager had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and DoLS.

No concerns were raised about the staffing levels and the manager told us staffing levels were reviewed monthly and adjusted accordingly to the dependency levels of people who lived at the home.

During the course of our inspection we looked at various records. These included care plans, risk assessments, policies and procedures and minutes of various meetings. We found records to be accurate and up to date. We found people’s care records were stored securely.

We saw the home followed safe recruitment procedures which meant people were kept safe as suitable staff were employed.

There was a range of activities available which people could chose to join in with. Staff displayed care and kindness with people and treating them with dignity and respect. People, relatives and other health professionals spoke positively about their relationships with staff.

People were able to make choices in relation to their daily lives, for example choosing what they wanted to eat and staff respected these wishes. Relatives we spoke with told us they were able to make their views known about the care and support provided for their relative. However the majority of the people were negative about the food. We found that people were not always protected against the risks associated with dehydration. We observed drinks were not always offered.

Staff were up-to-date with a range of core training and received regular supervision and support. Staff told us they felt supported by the manager.

People’s needs were assessed and care and support was planned and delivered to meet people’s individual needs. Care plans contained personalised information to ensure staff knew how to support people and meet their needs. Staff were familiar with people’s individual needs and their key risks.

Staff, people, relatives and other health professionals told us they found the manager to be approachable and accessible and we observed an open and relaxed atmosphere in the home. Quality assurance systems were in place which included seeking the views of people that used the service.

 

 

Latest Additions: