Healey House rated ‘Outstanding’ by CQC

Photo: Google, DigitalGlobe

Part of Healey House as seen from Market Street

Healey House care home has been rated as ‘Outstanding’ by the Care Quality Commission (CQC) after an unannounced inspection in September.

Healey House, located on Oakenshaw Avenue, Whitworth, provides accommodation and personal care and support for up to ten people with a learning disability. At the time of the inspection, there were nine people accommodated in the home, which is part of a wider service provision including a day care facility, respite care and supported living.

CQC officials found the service provided by Healey Care Ltd was an ‘outstanding level of care and support that placed people at the heart of their care’ and ‘promoted their right to be independent’. All who inspectors spoke with had ‘nothing but praise’ for the service and the ‘excellent quality of life’ people living in the service experienced. Staff embraced people's diversity which was reflected in the support plans, and people’s rights to privacy, dignity, and freedom of choice were ‘firmly embedded’ into the culture of the home.

Marie Bennion, Registered Manager, said: “Our outstanding CQC rating is a wonderful recognition for our service here at Healey House. This amazing achievement really is one for the team and for Healey Care Ltd as a social care provider. The people we support and their families are at the heart of everything, and our great staff and management team must be given credit for their consistent hard work and dedication.

“We are all very proud and delighted to be amongst the most highly rated services in the north west, and indeed the UK.”

Inspectors saw the service was very much ‘family-run’, with the provider and their family members known by staff and people using the service. They were ‘a visible presence in the service’.

Inspectors observed ‘excellent relationships’ between people, with management and staff demonstrating ‘exceptional insight’ and understanding of people’s personal values and needs. People were ‘happy and relaxed with staff’ and everyone spoke with was ‘very complimentary about the service’, describing it as ‘exceptional’.

The registered manager was referred to as ‘an excellent leader who placed people at the heart of everything they did’. There was an ‘excellent standard of organisation within the service’ that ‘fully supported’ continuous improvement and ensured people received a high-quality service that met their needs and expectations.

People living in the home told inspectors they felt safe and staff treated them well. Staff understood their responsibilities to safeguard people from abuse and had challenged other services when people were not being treated fairly. People using the service had undertaken safeguarding and health and safety training with staff; this had helped them recognise when they were at risk and the action they needed to take to keep themselves and others safe. Staff were clear about their responsibilities for reporting incidents in line with local guidance.

Each person had been involved in the development of their own support plans and risk assessments which provided clear guidance for staff on how to meet their needs and preferences.

Care and support was ‘focused on people's wishes and preferences’ and people were supported to be ‘as independent as possible’ in all aspects of their lives such as activities, outings and meal preparation. Activities were provided both inside and outside the wider service, and were meaningful, varied, and personal to people’s requirements.

Assessment of people’s needs was an on-going process which meant any changes to their care was managed very well. Communication between people using the service, relatives and staff was seen to be excellent by the inspection team. People who had difficulty using words or expressing their needs were very well supported by the use of other methods of communication to relay their wishes and feelings.

People were supported to keep in contact with friends and family and there were ‘excellent facilities’ within the wider service to enable this. Facilities included a service user led forum that met regularly to suggest and drive forward improvements and developments to the service that they felt were important. The forum members had developed policies and procedures that were user friendly, accessible and meaningful to people using the service. There was also a social centre, run by a committee of service users, which held evening and daytime activities, events and entertainments for people, their families and friends.

Risk assessments were wide-ranging and thorough and informed staff of the actions to take to support people safely. Staff had been trained in positive behaviour support which helped them to respond to difficult situations in an appropriate and safe way. Staff also fully understood how people with limited communication expressed themselves.

There were ‘appropriate arrangements’ in place in relation to the safe storage, receipt, administration and disposal of medicines. Staff responsible for administering medicines had been trained.

CQC officials found staff were happy working at Healey House, and were ‘highly motivated and committed to providing a high quality of care’. People were supported by a staff team that cared about them, knew them and who they knew well.

Safe recruitment procedures were followed to ensure prospective staff were suitable to work in the home and people were involved in the selection of new staff. Records showed they had a ‘good awareness’ about the skills and personality they wanted new staff to have, and people's opinions about new staff had been respected.

Staff felt valued and respected by the management team, and were confident in their roles because they were well trained and supported by the registered manager to gain further skills and qualifications relevant to their work.

Everyone spoke with was very positive about staff knowledge and skills and felt their needs, or those of their family member or their client, were being met appropriately.

There were appropriate arrangements in place to support people to have a varied and healthy diet. Staff worked closely with healthcare professionals to ensure people’s dietary needs were met and potential problems associated with nutritional intake were avoided. Special diets such as low fat and vegetarian diets were catered for, including those diets relating to cultural and religious observance.

Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service provided and ensure people received safe and effective care, including innovative ways of seeking and responding to feedback from people in relation to the standard of care. There was evidence where people’s views and opinions had been listened to and acted on.

The home was previously inspected in October 2014 where it was rated ‘Good’.