CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Hastings Lodge & Hastings Cottage
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed, including visitors, testing, protective equipment, cleaning, social distancing and self-isolation.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, November 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements during the Covid-19 pandemic.
Inspectors visited the home on 30 October 2020. This was an announced thematic review focused on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
They were assured that the home managed visitors, testing, personal protective equipment, cleaning, social distancing and shielding safely. There was also a contingency plan for a Covid-19 positive result and arrangements for people who needed to self-isolate.
People were supported with activities, including themed days. Inspectors also found a stable staff team, no agency staff, suitable protective equipment and extra cleaning of high-touch areas.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give a full Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating, and it does not provide a new overall rating.
Visitor safety
Visits were risk assessed and changed as infection rates changed. Indoor visits took place in people's rooms when it was considered safe.
“Safe arrangements were in place for visitors to the service including health professionals and relatives.” from the report
Testing and self-isolation
Regular testing was in place for staff and residents. People could self-isolate in their rooms, with alternative arrangements where this was difficult.
“There was a regular programme of Covid-19 testing in place for staff and people living in the service.” from the report
Staffing and protective equipment
The home had a stable staff team who did not work in other care settings, and inspectors saw suitable protective equipment with sufficient supplies.
“There was a stable staff team who did not work in any other care settings.” from the report
Cleaning
Enhanced cleaning included frequently touched areas. An extra domestic worker had been employed during the pandemic.
“Enhanced cleaning schedules were in place including high touch areas such as door handles and hand rails.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visits currently managed, and how are risks assessed when infection levels change?
- 02What testing arrangements are now in place for staff and residents?
- 03What would happen if someone tested positive, and how would responsibilities be shared?
- 04How would you support a resident who could not remain in their room to self-isolate?
- 05How often are high-touch areas cleaned, and are there enough staff and protective supplies?
This was an announced thematic review of infection prevention and control only; it was not a full inspection and no ratings were awarded. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 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, December 2019
Hastings Lodge & Hastings Cottage was rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but medicines safety needed improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 5 and 6 November 2019. One inspector spoke with five people and five staff, and reviewed care records, medicine records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, caring, responsive and well-led were all rated Good. People said they felt safe, listened to and well cared for, and staff knew them well.
Safe was rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found gaps in medicine records, missing information about applying prescribed creams and some risks that were not fully recorded in care plans. The managers said they would put these issues right immediately.
Kind and respectful staff
People spoke positively about staff who knew them well and treated them as individuals.
“People were supported by caring staff who knew them well and people using the service spoke highly of the staff team.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's choices, preferences and how they wanted support to be provided. People were involved in planning their care.
“People had individualised care plans, which detailed the care and support they needed, including people's likes, dislikes, preferences and how they wanted their care to be provided.” from the report
Choice and independence
Staff supported people to make choices and do what they could for themselves. The home also supported people to develop skills and take part in activities.
“People were supported to take risks when appropriate.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to attend day centres, work placements and social activities that matched their interests.
“Activities included piano lessons, horse riding, aromatherapy and music evenings.” from the report
Accessible management
Managers were available to people and staff, and staff said they felt supported in their roles.
“The registered managers had a visible presence within the service.” from the report
Medicine records
seriousMedicine administration records contained gaps. This created a risk that people might not receive medicines correctly, although inspectors found no evidence of harm.
“Medicine administration records (MAR) had gaps in recording. This meant the people could be at risk of not receiving their medicines correctly.” from the report
Information about prescribed creams
needs fixingRecords did not say where some prescribed creams should be applied. Managers said they would introduce body maps.
“When people required staff to support them with prescribed creams, there was no record of where to apply the cream.” from the report
Choking risk information
seriousOne person's speech and language guidance had not been added to their care plan. This could put the person at risk if staff did not know what support was needed.
“One person who had risks associated with choking, their speech and language guidelines had not been incorporated into their care plan.” from the report
Quality checks
needs fixingAudits had not picked up some missing signatures, reasons in medicine records and gaps in fluid charts.
“Audits completed had not identified some of the concerns raised during inspection.” from the report
- 01Have all gaps in medicine administration records been resolved, and how are these records now audited?
- 02How do staff know where to apply prescribed creams, and are body maps in place for each person who needs them?
- 03Has the speech and language guidance for people at risk of choking been added to their care plans?
- 04How are fluid records checked, and how is each person's required fluid intake recorded?
- 05What changes have been made to the home's quality audits since inspectors found that they had missed record-keeping problems?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that looked at the premises, care and all five CQC questions; inspectors spoke with five people and five staff and reviewed records for four people. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 December 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 Hastings Lodge & Hastings Cottage
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Hastings Lodge & Hastings Cottage →
- December 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Hastings Lodge & Hastings Cottage →
- May 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 May 2013.
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 West Northamptonshire
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 £1,280 a week. 87 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“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.”
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.