Herondale

Ratings

• Overall

  Requires improvement

• Safe

  Requires improvement

• Effective

  Good

• Caring

  Good

• Responsive

  Good

• Well-led

  Requires improvement

Our view of the service

Herondale is a residential care home providing accommodation with personal care for up to 8 people. The service provides care to older and younger people with mental ill health, people with learning disabilities and autistic people and those who misuse drugs and alcohol. There were 7 people living at the service at the time of our assessment. We carried out our on-site assessment on 22 October 2024. We looked at all key questions and all quality statements. We found 3 breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 in relation to safe care and treatment, infection prevention and control, safe environments and good governance. Information relating to people’s individual risks was not always recorded, up-to-date or did not provide enough detail as to how identified risks should be managed and mitigated. People were not protected from the risk of fire. Infection prevention and control measures were not in place to keep people safe. Governance systems and audits were not effective in identifying or addressing the concerns we found. We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment. We have assessed the service against ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ guidance to make judgements about whether the provider guaranteed people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices, independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. At the time of the assessment, the location did not care or support anyone with a learning disability or an autistic person. However, we assessed the care provision under Right support, right care, right culture, as it is registered as a specialist service for this group of people.

People's experience of this service

People told us they felt safe living at the service. Staff were kind and caring and there was enough staff who knew them well. People were involved in their plan of care, including what they wanted to do and choice of meals. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People enjoyed visits from their family members at times convenient to them. We observed people did not have a safe and clean environment to live in. The provider's infection prevention control processes were not robust. Environmental risks including fire safety were not well managed or monitored. Risks to people's safety were not always well documented and updated. People's care plans were not up to date with their current needs and circumstances.