CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Halliwell
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including PPE, testing, cleaning, visitor checks, social distancing and plans to manage outbreaks.
- 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?
- Outstanding
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Halliwell was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong COVID-19 infection controls and support for family contact.
This was a targeted, announced inspection on 10 March 2021. It focused on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, rather than a full review of the home.
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, arranged testing, kept the building clean, and had plans to manage COVID-19 outbreaks. Visitors were screened, tested and asked to wash their hands on arrival.
People were supported to keep in touch with family and friends by phone, online and through carefully arranged visits. Staff also provided activities and social bubbles so people could interact safely.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for the other key questions.
Family contact
Staff supported people to keep in touch with family and friends by telephone, online and through visits designed to reduce infection risk.
“People were well supported by staff to have telephone and internet contact with their family and friends.” from the report
Infection controls
The home had PPE available, tested people and staff, and had plans to isolate people with COVID-19.
“The registered manager had plans in place to isolate people with COVID-19 to minimise transmission.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
Visitors were screened, tested and asked to wash their hands. Visits included outside visits and a screened room.
“The staff facilitated in person visits in a manner which minimised the risk of infection spread, including outside visits, and visits using a specially adapted screened room through an external door on the ground floor of the home.” from the report
Activities and social contact
Dedicated staff supported activities, and social bubbles helped people interact and join group activities more safely.
“Social bubbles had been created within the home so that people could interact more freely and participate in group activities.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you currently arrange visits and support contact with family and friends?
- 02What is your current plan for isolating people if there is a COVID-19 outbreak?
- 03How are residents and staff currently tested for COVID-19, and how is PPE made available?
- 04What activities are available now, and how do you help residents interact safely?
- 05How do you screen and test visitors before they enter the home?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it was not a full inspection and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 April 2021 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, October 2019
Rated Good, with Outstanding responsiveness; inspectors found kind, personalised care but identified late medicines and an audit that had missed this.
This was a planned inspection on 10 and 11 September 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led were rated Good. Responsive was rated Outstanding. Inspectors found respectful care, strong activities, well-reviewed care plans and very good support at the end of life.
Inspectors found that some time-specific medicines had not always been given at the prescribed time. The home acted during the inspection by adding reminders for nurses. Inspectors were satisfied with the immediate response, but said they would check this again.
Compared with the previous inspection, Responsive improved from Good to Outstanding. Well-led fell from Outstanding to Good. The other ratings remained Good.
Personalised care
Care plans gave staff clear information about people's health, emotional, physical and social needs. They were reviewed when people's needs changed.
“Care plans were person-centred and regularly reviewed to reflect people's changing needs.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People could join group or one-to-one activities, including activities in their rooms. The home also supported contact with relatives and the local community.
“People living at Halliwell continued to be supported to participate in a wide range of personalised and group activities that met their social and sensory needs.” from the report
End-of-life support
The home provided protected time and designated staff for people receiving end-of-life care. Staff also had opportunities to reflect and support each other after someone died.
“People received outstanding end of life care and support in their final days at Halliwell.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff offering reassurance, preserving dignity and encouraging people to do what they could for themselves.
“Throughout the inspection we observed staff positively interacting with people in a kind and caring manner.” from the report
Staffing and training
Inspectors found enough staff to keep people safe and saw staff respond promptly. Training covered safeguarding, falls, infection control, medicines-related needs and other care skills.
“Throughout the inspection we observed staff supported people swiftly and had sufficient time to sit and speak with people.” from the report
Late time-specific medicines
seriousSome people did not receive medicines at the prescribed time. The home introduced alarms and electronic reminders during the inspection, but this should be checked to make sure the improvement lasted.
“During the first day of the inspection we identified there had been instances whereby people had not received their 'time specific' medicines at the prescribed time.” from the report
Medicines audit missed the problem
needs fixingThe medicines audit had not identified the late administration of a specific medicine. The manager acted immediately, and inspectors said they would review this at the next inspection.
“However, during the first day of the inspection we identified the medicines audit had failed to highlight instances of a specific medicine being administered later than intended.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure time-specific medicines are given at the prescribed time?
- 02What did the next medicines audits show after the alarms and electronic reminders were introduced?
- 03How are care plans reviewed when a resident's needs change, and how are those changes passed to all staff?
- 04How would a resident who stays in their room receive activities and one-to-one time?
- 05How are relatives involved in care plan reviews and decisions about end-of-life wishes?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions; Responsive improved from Good to Outstanding, while Well-led fell from Outstanding to Good and the other ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 October 2019 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 Halliwell
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- December 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Outstanding
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.