CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Haddon Court Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe and inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines practice and good infection control. They found no concerns about managing safe eating and drinking in relation to the choking concern that prompted the inspection.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Risk management and auditing systems had weaknesses and new measures were still being embedded. The home had not recently held residents' and relatives' meetings or used satisfaction surveys.
What inspectors found, February 2024
Rated Good overall; safe care was rated Good, but well-led was Requires Improvement and risk and oversight systems were still being developed.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 31 October and 7 November 2023. Inspectors looked only at Safe and Well-led. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and professionals, observed care, looked around the home and checked care, medicines and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe. People said they felt safe. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines practice and good infection control. They found no concerns about managing the choking-related risks that prompted the inspection.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Well-led. The provider had identified weaknesses in risk management and auditing, but new systems were still being put in place. The home had also not recently held residents' and relatives' meetings or used satisfaction surveys.
The overall rating stayed Good because the other three question ratings were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection in 2019. This inspection did not examine the circumstances of the death that prompted the inspection.
People felt safe
People were protected from abuse and staff had training and guidance about keeping people safe.
“People were protected against the risk of abuse. Staff received training to understand what abuse was, how to recognise it and steps to take to keep people safe.” from the report
Safe staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found staffing levels were based on people's needs and recruitment systems remained safe.
“The provider took a systematic approach to ensure staffing levels met people's needs safely.” from the report
Safe medicines practice
Staff followed safe medicines procedures, gave medicines in a person-centred way and had their competence checked.
“Medicines were managed safely and properly. We observed staff followed safe processes during the inspection and administering medicines in a person-centred way.” from the report
Kind, person-centred culture
People and relatives gave positive feedback about the staff and manager. Inspectors found the culture was open, inclusive and focused on people.
“The provider and manager had created a culture that was open, inclusive and put people at the centre of the care and support they received.” from the report
Risk systems still developing
needs fixingThe provider had recently found weaknesses in risk management. New digital care planning and risk assessment arrangements were being introduced and needed time to become established.
“The provider had recently found shortfalls in their risk management process and implemented new measures to address this, which will take time to embed.” from the report
Some incidents were not reviewed
seriousStaff did not always flag accidents and incidents for the manager to review. The provider took immediate action through further training and extra monitoring.
“However, we found staff did not always flag these events for review by the manager.” from the report
Audits and feedback needed improvement
needs fixingAuditing systems were not yet reliable enough, and the home had not recently held meetings with residents and relatives or used satisfaction surveys.
“Since the manager started in post around May 2023, they had not held a residents and relatives meeting, but told us they were looking at how best to do this.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to risk assessments and care plans since the inspection, and how do you check that they are working?
- 02How do staff now make sure every accident or incident is flagged, investigated and used for learning?
- 03Have you started regular residents' and relatives' meetings or satisfaction surveys since the inspection?
- 04What audits are now used to check the environment, care planning, infection control and risk management?
- 05Has the manager applied to register with CQC, as there was no registered manager in post at the inspection?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other three question ratings were carried forward from the previous comprehensive inspection in 2019. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 February 2024 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.
What inspectors found, January 2022
Haddon Court Limited was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control, visiting arrangements and staffing measures during the pandemic.
Inspectors visited on 11 January 2022. This was an announced, targeted inspection focused on infection control, visiting arrangements and any staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
The home supported regular family visits, with visitors tested before entry. It also offered virtual visits using a large screen, including for people with visual impairment.
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, followed infection control guidance, supported testing and managed admissions and visits safely. They were also told that staffing levels were sufficient and absence was covered.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not provide an overall quality rating or full ratings for all five areas.
Family contact
The home supported regular visits from relatives and offered virtual visits as an alternative, including support for people with visual impairment.
“Relatives could visit regularly and were tested before entry to ensure everyone's continued safety.” from the report
Staffing continuity
The provider said staffing levels were sufficient during the pandemic, including when staff were absent. This helped maintain consistency for residents.
“The workforce covered absence, without detriment to their effectiveness, so that people had consistency of staff who knew them.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had enough protective equipment, provided training and checked infection control practices.
“Sufficient supplies of PPE supported staff to keep people safe.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are relatives currently able to visit, and are visitors still tested before entry?
- 02How do you cover staff absence now, and could staffing pressures affect the consistency of care?
- 03How do you check that infection control practices and protective equipment are being used correctly?
- 04How do you support virtual visits for residents who cannot easily use standard video calls?
- 05How do you ensure staff and visiting professionals meet the current COVID-19 vaccination requirements?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not provide a full rating of the service. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 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 Haddon Court Limited
4 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2024Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 December 2010.
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
32 live-in carers within about an hour of Blackpool
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 £1,250 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“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.”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
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.