CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Halton View 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 2023
Halton View Care Home was rated Inadequate and placed in special measures; inspectors found serious risks involving safety, medicines and management.
Inspectors visited without notice on 22 June, 27 June and 4 July 2023. Two inspectors and a medicines inspector reviewed records, medicines, staffing, the environment and how people were supported. They spoke with people, relatives and staff.
The home was not consistently safe. Risks were not always assessed or managed, medicines records and administration had serious shortfalls, safeguarding concerns were not always acted on promptly, and some areas were visibly unclean. Staffing during meals did not always provide people with the support they needed.
Care planning was not always accurate or personalised. People's choices, communication needs and activities were not consistently supported. Inspectors also found that management and quality systems had failed to identify and correct problems found at this and the previous inspection.
The overall rating fell from Requires Improvement to Inadequate. Safe and well-led were rated Inadequate, and responsive was rated Requires Improvement. The report says the home is in special measures and will be monitored and re-inspected.
Positive staff relationships
Inspectors saw staff being gentle and supportive. They found that staff knew people well and had formed positive relationships.
“Interactions between staff delivering care and support to people were positive. Staff were gentle and supportive in their approach, and it was evident that positive relationships had been formed.” from the report
New manager's awareness
The newly recruited manager understood the role and had identified areas needing improvement. An action plan was being developed with local authority support.
“The newly recruited manager was responsive during the inspection. They had already identified areas of improvement needed around the service” from the report
Some social activity
On the ground floor, people had formed friendships and were seen talking, reading, doing puzzles and playing board games.
“People living on the ground floor told us that friendships had been formed with others and we saw people gathering in the lounge” from the report
Risks were not managed
seriousCare needs and related risks were not routinely assessed, reviewed or reduced. This exposed people to a risk of harm.
“People were exposed to a risk of harm as their care needs and associated risks had not been routinely assessed, reviewed, monitored, or mitigated.” from the report
Unsafe medicines management
seriousInspectors found problems with allergy information, staff competency checks, creams, timing, controlled drugs and medicines that were crushed for swallowing.
“Medicines to be administered at certain times were not always given at the prescribed times.” from the report
Safeguarding concerns
seriousIncident and safeguarding procedures were not always followed. Some incidents were not referred, investigated or reported quickly enough.
“Those incidents that had been reported were not always reported in a timely manner and therefore, actions to mitigate risk of harm to people were delayed.” from the report
Weak management oversight
seriousQuality checks did not reliably identify or correct problems. Records did not show consistently what care had been planned, provided or offered.
“Monitoring systems failed to identify and/or address all shortfalls found during the inspection process with risk management and mitigation, medicines management and governance.” from the report
Uneven activities and choice
needs fixingPeople on the first floor were not seen taking part in activities or social interaction. Meal choices and communication information were also inconsistent.
“No activities or interactions were seen to take place for people living on the first floor.” from the report
Cleaning and food storage
needs fixingSome areas were visibly unclean, including kitchen spaces. Some food was undated or out of date, and a frayed stair carpet created a potential trip hazard.
“Areas of the service were visibly unclean. Small kitchen areas had a build-up of food debris on equipment, floors and walls.” from the report
- 01What has been fixed to ensure medicines are given at the right time, recorded correctly and stored safely?
- 02How are you now checking that every person's risks, including falls, nutrition and weight, are assessed and reviewed when needs change?
- 03How do you make sure safeguarding incidents are reported, investigated and referred to other agencies without delay?
- 04What staffing arrangements are now in place during meals, particularly for people who need help or encouragement to eat?
- 05What changes have been made to activities, communication information and personalised care plans for people on both floors?
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection focused on the areas reported in the safe, responsive and well-led sections; the effective and caring ratings were not newly inspected and the report says uninspected ratings carry over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 October 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, October 2022
Halton View Care Home was rated Requires Improvement, with Safe rated Inadequate because inspectors found serious risks in safeguarding, medicines and risk management.
The inspection took place over several days in July and August 2022. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff. They observed care and reviewed care plans, medicines records, recruitment files, incident records and management checks.
Inspectors found that people could be at risk of harm. Safeguarding concerns were not always investigated or shared with the local authority. Risks were not always assessed or managed properly. Medicines records and checks were not always safe. Staff numbers were enough, but staff were not always placed where they were most needed.
The home was rated Requires Improvement overall. Safe was rated Inadequate. Responsive and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement. This was worse than the previous overall rating of Good, published in September 2020. The provider took immediate action during and after the inspection, and CQC asked for an action plan and said it would continue to monitor the home.
Infection control
Inspectors saw good infection control practice. Staff used protective equipment and the home was cleaned throughout the day.
“Staff followed good infection control practices and used personal protective equipment (PPE) to help prevent the spread of healthcare related infections.” from the report
Person-centred support
People and relatives gave positive examples of support that reflected individual needs and helped people achieve good outcomes.
“People and relatives provided many positive examples of how the home supported them in a person-centred way and described how they achieved good outcomes as a result.” from the report
Family contact
Staff helped people maintain relationships with relatives and friends, including during the COVID-19 pandemic.
“Relatives told us that staff had gone above and beyond to ensure contact was maintained with their loved ones throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.” from the report
Activities and friendships
Inspectors saw people spending time together, forming friendships and enjoying activities.
“Our observations found that friendships had formed in the home and we observed people gathering in the lounge and talking over a coffee and cake.” from the report
Choice and involvement
People were supported to make choices and contribute to the running and appearance of the home.
“People were encouraged to be involved in the running of the home.” from the report
Safeguarding failures
seriousSeveral safeguarding incidents were not properly investigated, followed up or shared with the safeguarding authority. This left people at risk of further harm.
“Multiple safeguarding incidents had occurred, and the provider had failed to investigate, take follow up action or share the concerns with the safeguarding authority.” from the report
Risks were not managed
seriousCare needs and known risks, including falls and physical altercations, were not always recorded accurately or followed by suitable safety measures.
“People were exposed to a risk of harm as their care needs and associated risks had not been routinely assessed, monitored and mitigated.” from the report
Medicines
seriousInstructions for some medicines given when needed were missing. Allergy information was not always recorded, and some staff checks were out of date.
“Medicines were not managed safely.” from the report
Weak management checks
seriousThe home's monitoring systems did not find all the problems identified by inspectors. Incident reporting and required notifications were also unreliable.
“Monitoring systems failed to identify all shortfalls found during the inspection process with risk management and mitigation, accident and incident analysis and governance.” from the report
Care plans lacked detail
needs fixingSome care plans did not give staff enough up-to-date guidance, including how to support people during emotional distress.
“Not all care plans were sufficiently detailed to guide staff on people's current care, treatment and support needs.” from the report
Staff deployment
needs fixingThere were enough staff overall, but they were not always deployed effectively to monitor people during periods of emotional distress.
“However, staff were not always deployed effectively to ensure effective monitoring of people during periods of emotional distress and this compromised people's safety.” from the report
- 01What action has been completed to investigate and report all safeguarding concerns to the local authority?
- 02How are current risks, including falls and possible conflict between residents, now recorded and reviewed?
- 03How do you check that medicines given when needed have clear instructions and that allergy information is up to date?
- 04How do you make sure staff are deployed safely when people are distressed, and that mandatory training and competency checks are current?
- 05How can a resident or relative escalate a complaint if they are not satisfied with the home's response?
This was a focused inspection that rated Safe, Responsive and Well-led; Effective and Caring were not inspected in this report, and previous ratings were used to calculate the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 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.
Every inspection of Halton View Care Home
7 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Inadequate.
- October 2023Inadequatecurrent ratingdown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- October 2022Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: InadequateResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Inspected but not ratedResponsive: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Good
- March 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 May 2012.
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 Halton
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. 89 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
“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.