Heron Hill Care Home

We undertook this assessment following information of concern received about how the service managed people’s health needs.

We assessed the quality statements from the key questions of safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led.

Staff knew how to report safety incidents, which were investigated by the management team and immediate actions were taken, where required. Where there were safeguarding concerns, these were shared quickly and appropriately with the relevant authorities. The service worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. The service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. The service made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. The service assessed and managed the risk of infection. However, the service did not always make sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences.

The service made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them. The service planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. The service worked well across teams and services to support people. The service supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. The service routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. The service told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

The service was exceptional at treating people with kindness, empathy and compassion and in how they respected people’s privacy and dignity. The service treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. The service was excellent at promoting people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. The service listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. The service always cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff and was exceptional at supporting and enabling staff to always deliver person-centred care.

The service made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs. The service understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. The service supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. The service made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. The service made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. People were given exceptional support to plan for important life changes, so they could make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

The service had a shared vision, strategy and culture. The service had exceptionally inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. The service fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. The service valued diversity in their workforce. For the most part, the service had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. The service understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. The service had a strong focus on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system.