Heather Holmes Care Home

There were effective systems and processes in place to make sure people were protected from harm and injury. However, some of these records had not yet been transitioned appropriately across to the new care reporting software. This could have meant some risks were not identified by the manager. We discussed these with the registered manager and area director, and they took immediate action to rectify these and put in place strategies to prevent re occurrence.

Staff were recruited safely and received training appropriate to their role which included specific training support for people with a learning disability and autistic people. The home was accessible, clean, and audits for maintenance were being used.

Staff understood how to reduce risks to people, to keep them safe whilst ensuring people were not subject to any unnecessary restrictions.

The service was safe and welcoming. Individual and environmental risks were assessed and regularly reviewed. People received their medicines when needed, by staff trained in medicines management. Some processes related to medicines management were not as efficient as they could have been, and these were improved upon.

The provider ensured that care plans were in place detailing how people’s assessed needs are met. People’s support needs were assessed and reviewed on a regular basis, which helped to ensure their needs continued to be met. Care plans and risk assessments were individual for each person and included their support in relation to a range of daily living skills and support areas. Staff were aware of the importance of asking for consent before supporting people and respecting their wishes. Where people did not have the mental capacity to make decisions, the provider had assessed this, worked with people's representatives to make decisions in their best interests and obtained authorisations for any restrictions. We did not assess all the quality statements within this key question as we did not identify concerns relating to these areas at our last inspection or since then.

Staff were kind, caring and polite. People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff responded to their immediate needs and were attentive. People took part in a range of different social activities which reflected their interests and choices. People were encouraged to make their own decisions and choices with support if needed. We observed people being offered choices in their daily lives. Staff communicated well with people and promoted an inclusive, supportive environment.

People are offered support to keep in touch with their relatives and people who are important to them, including end of life events.

People received person-centred care which met their needs. The provider listened to and involved people in making decisions about their care and the service. People's equality and diversity needs were met. We did not assess all the quality statements within this key question. We did not identify concerns relating to these areas which we judged as being met at our last inspection.

There was a positive and inclusive culture. People using the service and staff were valued and able to contribute to organisational developments. The registered manager was experienced. Staff found them supportive. There were systems for auditing and checking the quality of the service. These were effectively operated. The provider could demonstrate they made improvements in response to their own audits and feedback from others. This demonstrated lessons had been learned. There was a positive culture focused on meeting individual needs. Staff told us they were able to speak up and that the service was well managed. The provider worked in partnership with other professionals to achieve good outcomes for people.