Haviland House

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 13 May 2025. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Dates of Assessment: 14 April to 24 April 2025. Haviland House is a nursing home providing support to people living with dementia. The service is divided into ‘households’ which is intended to meet people’s needs throughout their dementia journey.

We inspected this service due to some concerns relating to staffing levels and people’s choices regarding what time they were supported to get up in the morning. We found staffing levels met people’s needs and people told us they were given choices of when they were supported. Records and discussions with staff confirmed this.

The provider was previously in breach of legal regulations in relation to safe care and treatment and good governance. Improvements were found at this inspection and the provider was no longer in breach of these regulations. At our last inspection, we made a recommendation regarding how consent was sought if support was given in people’s best interests. The provider had made improvements and mental capacity assessments were now completed; subsequent best interests decisions were made with people’s legal representatives.

The service was now led by a committed registered manager and management team. Quality assurance processes now provided a thorough oversight of the service. The registered manager looked for opportunities to continually improve the service by analysing patterns from accident, incidents, feedback and audit outcomes. Staff were able to give suggestions and raise concerns and told us managers listened to them.

Risks to people’s health were now managed well, health conditions were now being monitored and concerns acted upon. Accidents and incidents were now followed up with referrals to relevant professionals. Improvements had been made to medicine management; however, we identified improvements were needed in respect of record keeping. The management team immediately acted upon our feedback.Staff were safely recruited, regularly supervised and were given training opportunities to support them in their roles. Staff protected people from the risk of abuse by following the provider’s policies. The service was clean and staff used personal protective equipment appropriately. Equipment was regularly serviced and checks of the environment were completed to ensure the service was safe for people.Health and social care professional involvement was sought and their advice was included in people’s care record. Staff provided feedback to professionals so treatment plans could be adapted for positive outcomes for people. People were able to access appointments in-house and externally.

People were supported by a staffing team who knew them well. Staff understood people’s communication methods which were documented in their care plans. People received person-centred care and engaged with a programme of activities including entertainment and events run by staff.

People and their relatives were involved in decisions about their support. People’s feedback was listened to, for example, regarding meal choices. People’s nutritional needs were met and their dietary requirements were known by staff.

People were supported by staff who treated them with compassion and respect. People’s independence was promoted through staff practices, the layout of the service and through continual choices being offered.

The system for responding to concerns or complaints worked well, the registered manager looked for trends and cascaded any lessons learnt to the staffing team.