CQC Location ID:1-5763666791
Date of inspection: 24 September 2025 to 25 September 2025. Heartlands is a care home providing personal and nursing care to people aged 65 and over, some of whom are living with dementia. At the time of the inspection 65 people lived at the service. The accommodation is organised over three floors, each with its own communal areas. This inspection was carried out in response to information of concern received and the service’s aged rating. We found 2 breaches of legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment and good governance. The provider did not always manage people’s medicines safely and the recording of medicines administration was not always accurate. The environment was not always well maintained or safe, which had not been identified through the provider’s governance systems. The provider was in continued beach in relation to good governance. Although quality assurance systems and processes were in place, these were ineffective in identifying the concerns we found during this inspection. The provider’s audits had failed to identify the concerns we found at this inspection. Where checks carried out had identified risk and concerns with the care environment, these had not been addressed and mitigated. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities; however, they did not always follow best practice when monitoring people’s health and wellbeing in relation to repositioning, weight management and fortification of people’s diets. We observed some positive interactions between people and staff. People and families were always involved in their care planning and were aware of any changes in people’s health needs. Where people demonstrated distress or self-harm, care plans contained sufficient detail to ensure staff responded appropriately to promote positive outcomes. There were enough staff to keep people safe, and staff understood their role in reporting concerns about people’s health and wellbeing. The provider was proactive in ensuring staff had the training and support they needed for their role and remained up to date with best practice guidance. People received their prescribed medicines, but improvements were required in the management and recording of time specific/sensitive and ‘as required’ medicines. Staff were seen to be caring with people and to speak to them in a kindly way. There were meaningful activities to promote people’s emotional and social wellbeing. Where people lacked capacity to make their own decisions, there was evidence to show meetings were held to discuss best interest decisions for people. There were processes in place to support communication with other healthcare professionals and to ensure their advice was known and implemented into care plans. During this inspection we spoke with people who lived at the service, their relatives, staff, the newly appointed registered manager, the area service manager, the deputy manager and sought feedback from other healthcare professionals. We looked at care plans, recruitment files and quality assurance records. The management team were responsive to our findings and started taking immediate action to make improvements at the service. In instances where CQC has begun a process of regulatory action, we may publish this information on our website after any representations and/or appeals have been concluded, if the action has been taken forward. We have also asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.
We gained information about the views and experiences of people using the service and their relatives in several different ways. An Expert by Experience who had experience of caring for people living with dementia spoke with people and relatives during our inspection and made telephone calls to relatives. We made observations during our visits and spoke with staff and reviewed care records. This helped us gather information about the experiences of people who may struggle to communicate verbally with us. People told us they were happy living at Heartlands. They spoke positively about the staff who cared for them. One person said, “I feel safe because they look after me.” Another person told us, “The staff are friendly and approachable here.” Relatives told us they were satisfied with the care their loved ones received. One relative said, “Touch wood, I’ve had no complaints. I can’t fault them. They are very great and stop and chat.” Another relative told us, “My [relative] is thriving at the home. My [relative] has people around her all the time and feels safe.” We received mixed views from people and their relatives aboutstaffing levels in the home. Some people and relatives felt the numbers of staff available were sufficient, others were concerned that more staff were needed, particularly during busier times. We received positive feedback about the quality of the meals served at the service. People enjoyed their food, and we found their cultural preferences had been catered for. People told us they had choice and control over their day to day lives. They told us staff respected their wishes and generally knew their needs well. Most people spoke positively about the staff and the management team. Some relatives were concerned that some staff needed more training and experience. However, they felt, overall, the staff were very good. Everyone we spoke with felt the care provided was safe. No relatives had safety concerns about their loved ones. People and relatives commented positively on the activities provided at the service. They felt there was a lot to do, including trips out and events planned. One relative told us “They had schoolchildren go in, horses have gone in, singers. There is always something going on. They have a lot of activities. They had a Jewish service for a Jewish man. Every religion is served. They had a Caribbean day.” People told us they participated in the planning of their care, as did their loved ones.