CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Halcyon House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found robust safety measures, suitable staffing levels, safe recruitment and safe medicines management. There were vacancies and regular agency staff were being used, although call bells were answered in a timely manner.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training, induction, supervision and appraisal. People's health, nutrition, hydration and consent needs were assessed and reviewed.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives described staff as kind and respectful. Inspectors observed staff protecting people's dignity and supporting their choices and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans included personal preferences, routines and communication needs. The home offered activities, supported religious needs and had a complaints process.
- Well-led?
- Good
- A registered manager was in post and quality checks were described as robust and effective. However, quality surveys had not yet been given to people or relatives since the provider changed ownership.
What inspectors found, November 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, but noted staff vacancies, agency use and mixed views about food.
This was an unannounced inspection on 30 and 31 October 2018. Inspectors looked around the home, reviewed five people's care records, four staff files, training records, rotas and quality checks. They also spoke with people living there, relatives and staff.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, safe medicines management, clean surroundings and suitable risk assessments. Staff were trained and people were involved in their care.
People and relatives described kind and respectful care. Care plans recorded people's routines, preferences and communication needs. There were activities, a complaints process and regular checks on the quality of care.
Safe care
Inspectors found risk assessments, safety checks and emergency plans covering areas such as falls, pressure care and evacuation.
“There were robust measures in place to ensure people were safe.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors also saw staff speaking kindly, protecting dignity and involving people in conversations.
“People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion.” from the report
Personalised care
Care records included people's likes, dislikes, routines, life histories and communication needs. People and relatives were involved in planning care.
“Care plans had been developed where possible with each person, identifying the care and support they required.” from the report
Activities and choice
The home had activity coordinators and offered games, quizzes, exercise, crafts, entertainment and support with religious activities.
“Activities provided included board games, quizzes, art and crafts, weekly chair exercises, bingo and movie afternoons.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The manager and other senior staff carried out audits covering medicines, care records, safety, infection control and staff training.
“Quality assurance and auditing processes were robust and effective.” from the report
Vacancies and agency staff
needs fixingThere were vacancies for care staff, nursing staff and a deputy manager. Regular agency staff were covering the posts, and some people said they preferred regular staff.
“The vacant posts were currently being filled by regular agency care and nursing staff.” from the report
Mixed views about food
minorPeople had different views about the food. Some praised it, while others felt choices were repetitive and quality varied.
“There are always 2 choices but the food quality varies day to day” from the report
Quality surveys not yet completed
minorThe provider had not yet given quality surveys to people or relatives since taking ownership of the home in December 2017. Surveys were planned for the near future.
“Quality surveys were yet to be given to people living in the home and/or their relatives, since the new registered provider had taken ownership of Halcyon House in December 2017.” from the report
Some medicines records needed more detail
minorOne as-required medicine plan needed more detail, and body maps were not being used for prescribed creams. The manager addressed these matters by the end of the inspection.
“We found one plan required more detail to support staff to ensure they were giving a person their medicines for anxiety consistently.” from the report
- 01How are the vacant care, nursing and deputy manager posts being filled, and how do you make sure agency staff know each person's needs?
- 02What changes have been made to menus in response to residents who said the food choices were repetitive or the quality varied?
- 03Have quality surveys now been completed with residents and relatives, and what actions followed from the feedback?
- 04How do you make sure as-required medicines and prescribed creams are recorded and administered consistently?
- 05What is the current position on the outstanding Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisations?
This was an unannounced inspection of the whole service, covering all five CQC questions; the provider information return was unavailable because of technical problems at CQC. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 November 2018 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 House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- November 2018Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 December 2017.
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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Sefton
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 £1,270 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“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.”
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
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.