CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Haighfield Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, October 2022
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found unsafe storage, environmental risks and weak oversight, although people generally described kind care.
This was an unannounced inspection after a person fell down stairs and suffered a serious injury. Inspectors checked the home’s safety and leadership, but did not examine the specific circumstances of that incident. They visited on 23 and 24 August 2022 and carried out further checks by telephone and email until 6 September.
Inspectors found that creams, drink thickeners and cleaning products were not always locked away. Cluttered corridors created trip hazards. The fire risk assessment was out of date and the electrical installation report had expired. Some medicines records were incomplete, although medicine administration records were completed accurately.
Leadership and checking systems were not strong enough. Many staff had overdue supervision or appraisals. Meetings and feedback surveys were not held as regularly as expected. Confidential records were also left openly accessible. Inspectors found breaches of Regulation 12 and Regulation 17.
The overall rating changed from Good at the March 2019 inspection to Requires Improvement. This means inspectors found some important safety and management problems, with limited assurance that risks were always controlled.
Medication administration
Inspectors found that staff recorded administered medicines accurately. Plans were also in place for medicines given only when needed.
“We saw MAR's were completed accurately by staff when medicines were administered.” from the report
Safeguarding
People and relatives said they felt safe. Staff understood how to recognise and report abuse, and safeguarding training was in place.
“People and relatives told us they felt safe as a result of the care they received.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, use of protective equipment, testing, visiting arrangements and managing outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Care and outcomes
People and relatives were generally positive about the care and said it helped people achieve good outcomes.
“Although safety and governance of the service needed to improve, both people living at the home and relatives told us they were happy with the care provided” from the report
Staff recruitment
The required recruitment checks were completed, including applications, interviews, references and criminal record checks.
“Staff were recruited safely, with all the necessary procedures carried out.” from the report
Unsafe storage and trip hazards
seriousSome prescribed creams and drink thickeners were accessible in bedrooms. Cleaning products were unlocked, and clutter in corridors could cause people to trip.
“Cleaning products were not stored securely and were seen in unlocked cupboards with the key in the door.” from the report
Fire and electrical safety
seriousThe fire risk assessment had not been reviewed since September 2020. The electrical installation report had expired in February 2022, and electrical problems had occurred earlier in the year.
“The fire risk assessment had not been reviewed since September 2020 and the electrical installation report had expired in February 2022, which was a fire risk.” from the report
Staffing levels
needs fixingSome people, relatives and staff said staffing was sometimes insufficient. Inspectors recommended that the home review staffing numbers against people’s care needs.
“We recommend the service reviews their current staffing numbers to ensure they are sufficient to meet people's care needs safely given the feedback provided.” from the report
Weak management checks
seriousDaily safety walkarounds were not recorded, and provider audits did not always focus on the risks inspectors found. Many staff also had overdue supervision or appraisals.
“Appropriate systems were not in place to ensure adequate oversight of the service.” from the report
Feedback and meetings
needs fixingPeople, relatives and staff were not asked for their views regularly enough. Staff meetings and residents’ meetings were also less frequent than the home’s stated arrangements.
“The provider was not seeking feedback about the quality of service from people living at the home.” from the report
Confidential records
seriousStaff personnel files and personal care records were openly accessible in offices and communal areas.
“Confidential information was not stored securely, with documents such as staff personnel files and personal care records openly accessible in the office and communal areas.” from the report
- 01Are all medicines, creams, drink thickeners and cleaning products now locked away, and how is this checked each day?
- 02Has the electrical installation report been completed, and has the fire risk assessment been reviewed since the inspection?
- 03What changes have been made to staffing levels, particularly when agency staff are used?
- 04Are staff supervision and annual appraisals now up to date?
- 05How are confidential care and staff records kept secure, and how are residents and relatives now asked for feedback?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led following a serious injury; the other three key questions were not rated in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 October 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.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Haighfield Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control practices during a targeted COVID-19 review.
Inspectors visited on 17 February 2022. The inspection was announced 48 hours beforehand and was targeted at infection prevention and control during COVID-19. They also asked about staffing pressures.
Inspectors were assured that the home was screening visitors, checking relevant vaccination status, using protective equipment safely, arranging testing and supporting visits in line with current guidance.
The home had regular cleaning schedules, including deep cleaning of frequently touched areas. It also had measures to reduce the effect of COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
This was not a full inspection of the home. The overall service rating and the Safe rating were both recorded as inspected but not rated.
Visitor screening
Visitors were checked for symptoms before entering, and the home checked the vaccination status of relevant visitors.
“All visitors were screened for symptoms of acute respiratory infection before being allowed to enter the home.” from the report
Protective equipment
Staff changed into uniforms at the home, and inspectors found that protective equipment was used and disposed of appropriately.
“PPE was worn and disposed of appropriately throughout the home.” from the report
Cleaning
The home carried out regular general cleaning and deep cleaning of high-touch areas.
“Domestic staff were completing cleaning schedules for general cleaning and deep cleaning of high touch areas, which took place regularly.” from the report
Testing and infection controls
Inspectors were assured that testing followed current guidance and that the home had arrangements to prevent or manage outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was accessing testing for people using the service and staff.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you currently manage staffing pressures linked to illness or COVID-19?
- 02How are visitors screened for symptoms and how is vaccination or exemption status checked?
- 03How often are staff and residents tested when someone has symptoms or has been exposed to COVID-19?
- 04How often are high-touch areas deep cleaned, and can families see the cleaning records?
- 05How are visits arranged now, and what happens if there is an infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, with questions about staffing pressures; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 March 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 Haighfield Care Home
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- October 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 January 2011.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Wigan
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. 92 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“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.