CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hamilton Court
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, admissions, hygiene, social distancing and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not assess whether care was effective.
- Caring?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not assess whether care was caring.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not assess whether care was responsive to people's needs.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not assess whether the home was well-led.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control.
This was a targeted, announced inspection on 4 February 2021. It focused only on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home managed visitors, social distancing, new admissions, testing, PPE, hygiene and outbreaks safely. The infection prevention and control policy was up to date.
Staff had training in putting on and taking off PPE. The home also supported residents to understand face masks, keep in touch with cultural activities and access COVID-19 information in British Sign Language.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give a new overall rating or full ratings for all five areas of care.
PPE use
Staff had completed PPE training and used it in line with government guidance. PPE stations were available in key areas.
“Staff had completed training to don and doffing of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) correctly and wore it in line with current government guidance.” from the report
Safe admissions
New residents were tested for COVID-19 and isolated for 14 days. They had a named staff member to provide support during this period.
“New admissions to the home were tested for COVID-19 and required to isolate for 14 days.” from the report
Accessible information
The home used a computer programme to translate daily news into British Sign Language, helping residents follow COVID-19 information.
“The provider had purchased a computer programme which translated the daily news into British Sign Language” from the report
Support with face masks
Staff used discussions and games to help residents understand face masks and recognise staff wearing PPE.
“Staff supported people with a learning disability to understand and accept the requirement to wear face masks.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What are the home's current arrangements for preventing and managing infection outbreaks?
- 02How are new admissions tested and supported during any isolation period?
- 03How often are staff tested and trained to use PPE safely?
- 04How will information be made accessible to a resident who uses British Sign Language?
- 05What are the latest full CQC ratings for caring, effective, responsive and well-led care?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under Safe only; it did not rate the service overall or assess the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 March 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, January 2019
Hamilton Court was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, caring and well-managed support, with all five areas rated Good.
Inspectors visited the home without notice on 12 October 2018. They spoke with the manager, care staff and a relative, observed how people were supported, and reviewed care records, medicines, staffing, recruitment, training and quality checks.
They found enough staff to meet people's needs, suitable checks on staff, safe medicines arrangements and detailed risk assessments. People were supported with healthcare, food, activities and communication. Staff treated people with dignity, respected choices and helped people stay independent.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home had also been rated Good at the previous inspection, so the overall rating remained Good.
Safe staffing and risk planning
Inspectors found enough staff to keep people safe and saw detailed plans for managing individual and environmental risks.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to keep people safe.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored and administered safely. Records and checks showed people received medicines as prescribed.
“We found that there were appropriate arrangements in place for the safe management, administration and storage of medicines.” from the report
Respectful support
Staff respected people's privacy and dignity, offered choices and supported independence.
“Staff treated people with dignity and respect and helped to maintain people's independence.” from the report
Person-centred care
Staff understood people's backgrounds, preferences and support needs. People had key workers and care plans to guide their support.
“Staff were knowledgeable about the people they supported.” from the report
Healthcare support
People received ongoing support from health professionals, and outcomes from appointments were recorded for staff to follow.
“People had access to healthcare services and received ongoing healthcare support.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff could speak with the manager, and the provider regularly sought their views.
“The provider regularly sought the views of people who used the service and their relatives.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will staffing levels be adjusted if my relative needs extra support for activities or health appointments?
- 02How will staff communicate with my relative if they have limited verbal communication?
- 03How are my relative's medicines checked, including whether they have taken them as prescribed?
- 04How will my relative be involved in care reviews, choosing a key worker and decisions about their support?
- 05What activities and community visits could be arranged to match my relative's interests, culture and faith?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service and all five quality areas were rated; the report says the previous inspection was in 2015 and the ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 January 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 Hamilton Court
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 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 Birmingham
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 £950 to £1,230 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.