CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hartington Road Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors said the service was safe in relation to infection prevention and control. They were assured about visitors, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing and the infection control policy.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not looked at in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not looked at in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not looked at in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This was not looked at in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements, with some resources suggested for further development.
Inspectors visited the home on 22 October 2020. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic. It looked only at infection prevention and control.
They found a plentiful supply of protective equipment, suitable cleaning products and risk assessments for people and staff at higher risk. Staff received regular information and could access wellbeing support.
Activities continued in different formats to reduce isolation. Visits and visits from health professionals were planned with safety measures in place. Inspectors were assured that the home managed visitors, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing and its infection control policy safely.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not provide a new overall rating or ratings for the other four areas of care.
Protective equipment
There was plenty of protective equipment, and staff used it appropriately.
“The provider had ensured there was a plentiful supply of personal protective equipment and we saw staff used this appropriately.” from the report
Risk planning
Risk assessments covered people and staff who might be at higher risk. Staff also received information and access to wellbeing support.
“Risk assessments had been completed to protect people and any staff who may be at higher risk and measures were in place to support them.” from the report
Activities continued
Activities continued in different ways, with more activities inside the home to reduce the risk of isolation.
“Activities within the service had continued though in different formats with increased in house activities to reduce people's risk of isolation.” from the report
Planned visits
Visits had restarted with planning intended to protect people's safety. Visits from health professionals were also arranged in advance.
“Visiting has now re-commenced and is planned and completed with people's safety in mind.” from the report
Infection control systems
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, arranged testing and kept its infection control policy up to date.
“We were assured that the provider's infection prevention and control policy was up to date.” from the report
Further development suggested
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its infection control approach. The report does not say exactly what needed developing.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What infection prevention resources have you used to develop your approach since this inspection?
- 02How are visits currently planned and carried out to protect residents?
- 03How do you arrange testing for residents and staff?
- 04How are activities provided now to reduce the risk of isolation?
- 05What are the home's current ratings for Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not assess the other four key questions or provide an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 November 2020 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, June 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with all five areas rated Good.
This was an unannounced inspection by two inspectors on 16 May 2019. They observed staff with people, spoke with two people and four staff and managers, and checked records including care, medicines, staffing, incidents and quality checks.
The home supported six people at the visit and could accommodate up to eight people with learning disabilities and/or mental health needs. Inspectors found people were safe, well supported and treated with kindness. Staff knew people well, supported their choices and helped them take part in activities and community life.
All five CQC areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means inspectors found the legal requirements were met and that care and management were consistently good. The previous inspection in 2016 was also rated Good.
Trusted relationships
People appeared calm and settled and turned to staff for help or company. Staff knew people's preferences and supported them consistently.
“People were safe at Hartington Road. They were calm and settled and had relationships of trust with staff.” from the report
Accessible communication
The home used preferred languages, pictures and symbols to help people understand information and express themselves. Staff also recorded communication needs in care plans and passports.
“Staff used pictures and symbols to assist people to communicate and understand information.” from the report
Respect for identity
The home supported people from different cultural and religious backgrounds. Care plans included these needs, and staff supported people to maintain important relationships and attend places of worship.
“The home supported people from a range of cultural and religious backgrounds.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans described people's needs, choices and preferences. Staff supported people to make choices, take part in activities and be as independent as possible.
“People's care plans set out how they should be supported taking into consideration their privacy, dignity and cultural and other needs.” from the report
Quality monitoring
Managers used audits, reviews and action plans to check the service and make improvements. The report notes that a peaceful garden area had been created since the previous inspection.
“The registered manager had a quality assurance system in place which ensured all aspects of the service were audited and improvements made if necessary.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Are staffing levels and the flexible support described in the report still in place, including support for trips into the community?
- 02Which staff can communicate with my relative in their preferred language, and how will you support communication if their needs change?
- 03How will you support my relative's cultural, religious and dietary preferences in everyday life?
- 04How often will my relative's care plan and risk assessments be reviewed, and how will they or their representative be involved?
- 05What activities and community links are currently available, including access to places of worship and contact with family or friends?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering the premises, care and all five CQC questions; the previous ratings from 2016 were also Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 June 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 Hartington Road Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 January 2015.
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 Leicester
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. 83 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
“Tino was the most wonderfully rounded, empathetic and intuitive person. He not only developed a great relationship with Neville but also had a great working relationship with our existing carer.”
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.