CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Haslington Lodge Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk assessments and safe medicine management. Infection control arrangements were also considered satisfactory.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- People received personalised care, communication needs were recorded, and activities and trips were available. Complaints were investigated and responded to.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found stronger audits and monitoring, regular meetings and a more open culture. People, relatives and staff gave positive feedback about the service.
What inspectors found, June 2022
Haslington Lodge Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and well-managed support, with no breaches identified.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 28 and 29 April 2022. Inspectors spoke with people using the service, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicine records, recruitment files and management records. Infection prevention and control measures were also reviewed.
Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine systems and suitable guidance for managing risks such as falls and choking. People and relatives said they felt safe. Complaints, accidents and incidents were recorded and followed up.
People received personalised care and were supported to take part in activities and trips. Inspectors found an open culture, positive feedback about staff and management, and stronger systems for checking quality. The overall rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good.
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Responsive and Well-led. Effective and Caring were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels were sufficient for people's assessed needs. Call bells were answered promptly and staff said they did not feel rushed.
“There were sufficient staff to meet people's assessed needs.” from the report
Managing risks
Care records gave staff clear guidance about individual risks, including falls and choking. People were supported to remain as independent as possible while staying safe.
“Risks to people's health and welfare had been assessed, with guidance in place for staff to support people safely.” from the report
Personalised care
Staff knew people well and care was tailored to individual needs and preferences. End-of-life wishes were included in care plans.
“People were receiving care that was individual and personal.” from the report
Activities and social contact
People could join activities, use garden areas and go on trips. Staff also spent time with people who could not take part in group activities.
“People were supported to take part in activities and to enjoy preferred interests.” from the report
Improved management checks
The home had strengthened its audits and gathered feedback from people and relatives. Staff said they felt more listened to than at the previous inspection.
“A clear line of governance was evident in the monitoring and auditing structure.” from the report
No registered manager in post
minorThere was no registered manager at the time of the inspection. A new manager was in post and had started the application process to register with CQC.
“At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post.” from the report
- 01What progress has been made with the manager's application to register with CQC?
- 02How are you checking that the new electronic medicines system remains accurate, including records for medicines given when needed?
- 03How do you use feedback from residents and relatives to make changes, and what changes followed the latest survey?
- 04What activities and trips are currently available for someone with my relative's interests and mobility?
- 05Can you explain which ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection because Effective and Caring were not inspected this time?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Responsive and Well-led only; Effective and Caring were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 June 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.
What inspectors found, May 2021
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but concerns remained about safety, communication and management follow-through.
This was an unannounced planned follow-up inspection. Three inspectors visited on 31 March 2021 and reviewed records, medicines, staff files, audits and care plans. They also spoke with people, relatives and staff, and observed care.
The home was rated Good for Effective and Caring. People were supported with their health, nutrition, choices and independence. Inspectors saw kind interactions, and found care was personalised. Activities and contact with relatives were also supported.
The home was rated Requires Improvement overall, for Safe, Responsive and Well-led. Medicines were now managed safely, fixing the previous medicines breach. However, accident records, a lost hearing aid, recruitment records, communication and quality checks still needed improvement. The overall rating remained Requires Improvement, as it had for the last three inspections.
Medicines improved
The previous problems with medicines had been addressed. Records, storage checks and staff competency checks were in place.
“Medicines were managed safely. People received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with dignity and encouraged to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
“We observed kind and caring interactions between staff and people living at the home.” from the report
Good health support
Staff worked with healthcare professionals when people's needs changed, including for eating, medicines and other health needs.
“When people's needs changed support was sought from relevant healthcare professionals such as speech and language therapists and chiropodists.” from the report
Activities and relationships
The home offered activities based on people's interests and supported contact with relatives during the pandemic.
“People had been supported to maintain contact with their loved ones throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.” from the report
Accident records varied
needs fixingSome accident records did not explain how an incident happened or what action followed. One record did not describe the care given after a person fell and injured their head.
“Accidents and incidents were recorded however the details varied.” from the report
Lost hearing aid
needs fixingA person was left without effective help for their hearing because a lost hearing aid was not dealt with immediately.
“No immediate action had been taken by the registered manager leaving the person without effective means to aid their communication.” from the report
Quality checks did not always work
needs fixingAudits missed problems including a medicine room temperature issue and delays in dealing with maintenance actions. This meant action was not always taken promptly.
“The provider's quality assurance system was not always effective in identifying shortfalls.” from the report
Recruitment records
needs fixingSome staff files had gaps in employment history. The provider corrected these during the inspection and said it would audit all personnel files.
“We identified some gaps in employment history in personnel files however the provider rectified these during the inspection.” from the report
Communication and follow-through
needs fixingStaff said management did not always act on issues they raised. Inspectors recommended reviewing how feedback from people, relatives and staff is collected and used.
“Feedback from staff was that the management did not always address issues they raised.” from the report
Building needs updating
minorThe home was generally in need of redecoration and updating. Refurbishment had started on the ground floor and further work was planned.
“The service was in general need of re-decoration and updating.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure accident records explain what happened and what action was taken?
- 02What happened to the lost hearing aid, and how do you make sure communication aids are replaced quickly?
- 03How do your current audits identify medicine storage and maintenance problems before they become delays?
- 04How are relatives and staff now asked for feedback, and how do you show that issues raised are acted on?
- 05What refurbishment has been completed since the inspection, and what work remains?
This was an unannounced planned follow-up inspection covering all five key questions, with additional checks of infection prevention and control measures during the COVID-19 pandemic. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 May 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.
Every inspection of Haslington Lodge Care Home
4 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- June 2022Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2021Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2020Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2020Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 January 2019.
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.