CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Harefield Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about preventing infections, safe visiting, cleaning, ventilation, protective equipment, testing, admissions and the infection-control policy. They asked for visiting and community visiting care plans to be more personalised.
- Effective?
- Good
- This inspection did not assess or rate this question.
- Caring?
- Good
- This inspection did not assess or rate this question.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- This inspection did not assess or rate this question.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This inspection did not assess or rate this question.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong COVID-19 infection-control arrangements, with visiting care plans needing to be more personalised.
This was a targeted inspection about infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic. Inspectors visited on 19 March 2021 and completed a virtual follow-up review on 31 March 2021.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks. It was clean, well ventilated and had recorded regular cleaning. Staff had suitable protective equipment, training and access to testing. People and staff were encouraged to take part in the COVID-19 vaccination programme.
The home supported visits with relatives through screening and lateral flow testing. It also used easy-read information to help people understand the pandemic. Inspectors asked the provider to make individual visiting and community visiting care plans more personalised.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not provide an overall quality rating or ratings for most care areas.
Safe visits
The home offered ways for people to visit loved ones safely, including visitor screening and lateral flow testing.
“We noted the provider took steps to support people to have safe visits with their loved ones if they wished” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors saw that the home was clean and that regular cleaning was recorded. Ventilation was also considered.
“We observed the home was clean and staff completed regular cleaning activities which were recorded.” from the report
Protective equipment
Staff had enough suitable protective equipment and used it in line with national guidance. They had updated infection-control training.
“Staff had access to ample supply of appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), and we observed this was used in line with national guidance.” from the report
Information for people
The home used easy-read information to help people understand the pandemic.
“People were supported to understand information about the pandemic using easy read information which was prominently displayed in the service.” from the report
Testing and vaccination
People and staff had access to regular testing, and the home encouraged participation in the national COVID-19 vaccination programme.
“People and staff had access to regular testing in line with national guidelines.” from the report
Visiting plans
minorInspectors asked the provider to ensure individual visiting and community visiting care plans were personalised. The report does not say that this caused harm.
“We have signposted the provider to ensure people's individual visiting and community visiting care plans were personalised.” from the report
- 01How have individual visiting and community visiting care plans been made more personalised since the inspection?
- 02What are the current arrangements for visits with relatives, including testing and visitor screening?
- 03How do people receive information about infection risks in a way they can understand?
- 04How often are staff and people tested for infections, and what happens after a positive result?
- 05When was the home's infection prevention and control policy last reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 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, January 2019
Harefield Lodge was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, with Outstanding support tailored to people's individual needs.
This was a comprehensive inspection on 1 and 2 November 2018. The first day was unannounced. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and a health professional. They observed care and checked care records, medicines records, staffing, recruitment, training, building safety and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led were all rated Good. Responsive improved from Good to Outstanding. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines systems, well-maintained premises and care plans that reflected people's needs.
Inspectors particularly praised the highly individual support people received. Staff adapted activities, communication and living spaces to help people make choices, become more independent and feel calmer. The report says there was no evidence of serious risks or concerns.
Highly personal support
Staff adapted care, communication and surroundings to people's individual needs. This helped people move forward, feel calmer and increase their independence.
“People received outstanding person-centred care from a staff team that showed innovation and tenacity to ensure people received care and support tailored to their specific needs” from the report
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough trained and experienced staff. Staff knew people well and rotas reflected the support needed.
“People were supported by appropriate numbers of trained, experienced, skilled staff who knew the people who lived at Harefield Lodge very well.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicine stocks and storage were checked and records were complete. Staff had up-to-date medicines training.
“People received their medicines in a safe way.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
The home had a calm and friendly atmosphere. Staff respected people's privacy, dignity and preferred ways of communicating.
“People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect by a staff team who knew them very well.” from the report
Meaningful activities
People were supported to enjoy a wide range of activities, adapted to their abilities and preferences. These included music therapy, cooking, swimming and community visits.
“People were supported to take part in a large range of interesting and innovative activities to maintain their independence, increase their wellbeing and prevent social isolation.” from the report
One incomplete employment history
minorInspectors found a large gap in one staff member's recorded employment history. The manager discussed it with the staff member and obtained a statement immediately.
“For one member of staff their employment history had a large period of time that appeared to be unaccounted for.” from the report
- 01How would you adapt support for my relative's particular sensory needs and communication style?
- 02How do you make sure there are enough trained staff when someone is ill or needs to attend a medical appointment?
- 03How are medicines, including creams and as-required medicines, checked and recorded for my relative?
- 04Which activities would suit my relative, and how would you help them take part at their own pace?
- 05How would you support my relative to move to a different room or flat if their needs changed?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, with the first day unannounced; all five ratings were assessed, and Responsive improved to Outstanding. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 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 Harefield Lodge
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- May 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 April 2014.
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
46 live-in carers within about an hour of Southampton
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 £1,350 a week. 39 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.