CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Halcyon Court Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks, safeguarding, staffing, medicines and infection control were managed safely. They found no evidence that the reported concerns about staffing or medicines had put people at risk of harm during this inspection.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this visit. Its rating was carried over from the previous inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found effective quality checks, good management oversight and an open, positive culture. Staff felt supported and people spoke positively about the care.
What inspectors found, February 2023
Halcyon Court Care Home is rated Good; inspectors found safe staffing, medicines management and positive leadership, but a serious incident was outside this inspection.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 16 January 2023. Inspectors looked mainly at safety and leadership, after concerns about an incident causing serious injury, staffing, medicines and environmental risks. The circumstances of the serious incident were not examined during this visit.
Inspectors found people were protected from avoidable harm. They found enough staff, safe recruitment, effective medicines systems and suitable infection control. People said they felt safe and were positive about the care and staff.
The home was rated Good overall, with Safe rated Good and Well-led rated Good. The other three areas were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were used. The last overall rating was also Good, published in September 2018.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs safely. Recruitment checks were also in place.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs safely.” from the report
Positive care culture
People consistently spoke well of the staff, manager and care they received. Staff also said they felt supported.
“People consistently spoke positively about the registered manager, staff and the care and support they received.” from the report
Quality oversight
The home used quality checks, staff meetings and shared learning to monitor and improve the service.
“Quality assurance systems and processes were in place to monitor and improve the service.” from the report
Serious incident was not examined
needs fixingThe inspection followed a serious injury, but inspectors did not examine the circumstances of that incident. A separate CQC investigation was still taking place, so this report cannot reassure families about what happened.
“As a result, this inspection did not examine the circumstances of the incident.” from the report
- 01What environmental risk was identified after the serious injury, and what changes have been made to reduce it?
- 02What is the current staffing level on each floor, including at night, and how are shortfalls covered?
- 03How are medicines audits used to identify and prevent errors?
- 04What is the current position of the CQC investigation into the serious injury incident?
- 05What are the home's current arrangements for assessing people's needs and responding to complaints, given that Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection control and specific staffing, medicines and environmental risks; the other ratings carried over from the 2018 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 February 2023 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
Halcyon Court Care Home was inspected but not rated; infection controls were reassuring, but some kitchen appliances were dirty.
This was a targeted inspection after a COVID-19 outbreak. Inspectors visited on 15 February 2022 and gave 24 hours' notice. They looked mainly at infection prevention and control, and asked about staffing pressures.
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable infection controls. Staff used protective equipment correctly, had regular COVID-19 testing and vaccinations, and received infection control training. The home also assessed visitor risks and carried out regular infection control audits.
The home was mostly clean, but some kitchen appliances were dirty. This was raised with the leadership team, which agreed to take immediate action. The home was inspected but not rated, so this report does not provide an overall quality rating.
Infection control checks
The home carried out regular infection prevention and control audits and had an up-to-date policy.
“Regular infection prevention control (IPC) audits were undertaken.” from the report
Protective equipment
Inspectors saw staff wearing masks correctly and were assured that PPE was being used safely.
“We were assured the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Testing and vaccination
Staff had regular COVID-19 testing and had received vaccinations. Staff also had training about preventing infection.
“All staff had regular testing for COVID-19, and all had received their vaccinations.” from the report
Dirty kitchen appliances
needs fixingThe home was mostly clean, but inspectors found some dirty kitchen appliances. This was raised with the leadership team, which agreed to take immediate action.
“The location was clean, however we found some dirty kitchen appliances.” from the report
- 01What action was taken to clean the kitchen appliances found to be dirty?
- 02When was the follow-up audit of cleaning standards completed, and what did it show?
- 03How are you currently managing staffing pressures linked to COVID-19, and have these affected people's care?
- 04How do you check that visiting professionals meet the vaccination requirements or have a valid exemption?
- 05How often are infection prevention and control audits completed, and can you explain the latest findings?
This was a targeted inspection triggered by a COVID-19 outbreak, focused on infection prevention and control and staffing pressures; only Safe was inspected and it was 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 Halcyon Court Care Home
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 November 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Leeds
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. 89 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Took his time to learn about me read my care plan and to listen to me. great companionship with lots of laughing.”
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.