CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Fleetwood Hall
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, appropriate safeguarding arrangements and risk assessments. They were not assured that all staff followed best practice on infection prevention because several had painted nails, but the manager acted on this.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received support with healthcare, food and drinks, and staff had training and induction. Some people had to wait for help at an upstairs mealtime, and the manager reviewed staff deployment.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors observed warm, respectful and unhurried interactions. Staff supported privacy, dignity, independence and people's choices, although some staff used language that was task orientated.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's choices and preferences. The home supported communication needs, activities, relationships, complaints and end of life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team had systems to check quality, respond to shortfalls and gather people's views. Inspectors found an open culture, teamwork and links with other organisations to improve care.
What inspectors found, January 2022
Fleetwood Hall rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with minor concerns about infection practice, mealtime waits and staff language.
The inspection was unannounced and took place over 8 and 9 December 2021. Two inspectors and an Expert by Experience spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They observed care, checked the building and infection control, and reviewed care, medicine and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable care planning, support with health and nutrition, respectful care, varied activities and effective management oversight.
There were some minor shortfalls. Several staff had painted nails, some people had to wait for help at an upstairs mealtime, and some staff used task-focused language such as calling people 'doubles'. The manager took action about these issues, including reviewing staff deployment and arranging person-centred training.
Staffing and safety
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and saw that recruitment checks were completed. Risks were assessed and medicines were managed safely.
“There were enough staff to meet people's care and support needs. Staff were employed following a thorough recruitment process.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with dignity and respect. Inspectors saw friendly, gentle interactions and found that staff supported privacy and independence.
“We observed warmth from staff towards people and conversations were friendly and not rushed.” from the report
Activities and relationships
Activities were varied and aimed to provide social contact, stimulation and exercise. Staff also supported people to keep important relationships.
“Activities were varied, staff had worked hard with people to provide meaningful social activities to provide stimulation and exercise.” from the report
Management and improvement
The management team used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor the home and make improvements. The home also worked with other professionals on reducing falls.
“The management team had auditing systems to maintain ongoing oversight and continued development of Fleetwood Hall.” from the report
Infection prevention
minorSeveral staff had painted nails. Inspectors said this could conceal dirt or hold germs, and the manager took action to reduce the risk.
“Several staff had painted nails. Painted nails could conceal dirt and may also hold germs in any cracks.” from the report
Waiting for help at mealtimes
needs fixingSome people upstairs had to wait for support during a meal. This was raised with the manager, who reviewed staff deployment.
“When observing the mealtime experience upstairs, some people had to wait to receive support.” from the report
Task-focused language
minorSome staff referred to people as 'doubles' according to the level of help they needed. The provider arranged person-centred training to address this.
“Some staff sometimes used language that was task orientated. They referred to some people as 'doubles' based on the level of support they required from staff.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to ensure all staff follow the home's infection prevention rules, including the issue about painted nails?
- 02How do you make sure people receive prompt help during mealtimes, especially upstairs?
- 03What person-centred training has staff received since the inspection, and how do you check that language remains respectful?
- 04How will you assess and support my relative's nutrition, healthcare, communication and dementia needs?
- 05How are relatives involved in care planning, resident meetings and decisions about activities or end of life care?
This was an unannounced first inspection of the newly registered service covering all five key questions; infection prevention and control was specifically checked under Safe, and the previous provider's Good rating was published on 14 December 2019. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 January 2022 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Fleetwood Hall
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 January 2020.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,260 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.