CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hatfield Haven
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Risks were assessed, staff knew how to respond to abuse, staffing was sufficient and medicines were stored and administered safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff received induction, training and regular supervision. Inspectors found that staff needed more in-depth training to support people living with dementia, and the home agreed to look into this.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, considerate and respectful. Inspectors saw people being given time to respond, with privacy and dignity maintained.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and reviewed. The home provided activities, responded to complaints and had made improvements to its environment for people living with dementia.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The new manager had a clear vision and was making changes, but these were not yet fully established. Quality checks had not identified some problems with dementia support, meal choices and activities.
What inspectors found, October 2017
Hatfield Haven was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, but the home needed better dementia training and stronger quality checks.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 8 August 2017. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff, the manager and a healthcare professional. They observed care and meals, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment files, staffing records, complaints and quality checks.
Inspectors found that people were safe and received kind care. Risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely, staffing levels were sufficient and recruitment checks had been completed. People had access to healthcare, food and activities, and care plans were reviewed.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive were all rated Good. Well-led was rated Requires Improvement because the new manager was still making changes, staff needed more dementia training and quality checks had not found some of the problems inspectors identified.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff with the right skills to meet people's needs. People received prompt support and buzzers were answered without delay.
“There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely. Staff training and competency checks were in place.
“People's medicines were stored and administered safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were warm and considerate. Inspectors saw people being given time, privacy and support in a calm environment.
“Staff interactions with people were considerate and the atmosphere within the service was welcoming, relaxed and calm.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People and relatives were positive about the activities. Relatives could visit at times that suited them.
“People and relatives told us there was always something happening and said they were happy with the activities on offer.” from the report
Dementia training
needs fixingStaff had some knowledge of dementia support, but inspectors said they needed more detailed training. This mattered because most people supported had some form of dementia.
“However, they would benefit from more in-depth face to face training to increase their understanding of how to support people living with dementia.” from the report
Quality checks
needs fixingThe home had audits and monitoring systems, but these did not identify all the shortfalls found during the inspection. Managers needed to check more closely how care was experienced by people.
“There were quality monitoring systems in place but they had not identified some of the inconsistencies that we found.” from the report
Choice at meals
minorInspectors did not see visual food choices being used on the inspection day, even though some people living with dementia might need this support. The manager said the home would start using show plates.
“However on the day of our inspection we did not see these being used.” from the report
- 01What dementia training have staff completed since this inspection, and how is their understanding checked?
- 02How do you now make sure people living with dementia can choose their meals, including through visual prompts?
- 03How do you check that people are offered meaningful and stimulating activities each day?
- 04What changes have been made to the quality audits so they identify problems that inspectors previously found?
- 05Has the manager's application to become registered with CQC been completed?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, with the overall rating and each question rating assessed during the visit. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 October 2017 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, October 2016
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care and enough staff, but weaknesses in records, staff checks and dementia support.
This was an unannounced inspection on 28 July 2016. One inspector and an Expert by Experience visited, spoke with people, relatives, staff and the manager, observed care and meals, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment files and quality checks.
People and relatives generally spoke positively about the home. People said staff were kind, respectful and listened to them. There were enough staff, people were supported with food and healthcare, and complaints were investigated.
The inspectors found several areas needing improvement. Risk assessments and care plans were not always updated or detailed enough. Medicines records and audits were incomplete, staff did not always understand the Mental Capacity Act or dementia care, and regular staff supervision and competency checks had not been done.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Caring was rated Good. Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Requires Improvement, meaning the home was not consistently meeting the expected standard in these areas.
Kind and respectful care
People were treated warmly and with patience. Staff protected privacy and dignity and gave people time to respond.
“Staff interactions with people were considerate and the atmosphere within the service was welcoming, relaxed and calm.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Call buzzers were answered promptly and people were not rushed.
“There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Food and healthcare
People enjoyed the food and were offered choices. Their health needs were supported through contact with healthcare professionals.
“People were supported to have a balanced diet and to make choices about the food and drink on offer.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People enjoyed outings and could receive visits from relatives at times of their choosing. The home also arranged social and religious activities.
“A range of activities took place outside of the home and people told us they enjoyed going out” from the report
Medicines records and checks
needs fixingMedicines were generally stored and given safely, but handwritten additions were not always signed and checked. Regular medicine audits had not been completed.
“Some of the medication administration sheets had handwritten medication on them and these additions should have been signed by staff and checked for accuracy.” from the report
Dementia-friendly environment and activities
needs fixingThe home lacked some features to help people living with dementia find their way around and stay stimulated. Indoor activities did not always meet their needs.
“The home environment was not 'dementia friendly'” from the report
Quality monitoring
needs fixingThe home's checks did not identify the concerns found during the inspection. There was also no formal system for collecting people's views.
“Although systems were in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service provided, they were ineffective as they had not highlighted the areas of concern we had identified.” from the report
- 01How are care plans and risk assessments now updated when a person's needs change?
- 02What checks are now made on handwritten medicine entries, and how often are medicine audits completed?
- 03How do you check that staff are competent in manual handling and other care tasks?
- 04What training have staff received about dementia care, the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards?
- 05How do you now gather and act on the views of people living in the home and their relatives?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including observations, discussions and checks of care, medicines, staffing and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 October 2016 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 Hatfield Haven
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- October 2017Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 December 2010.
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
35 live-in carers within about an hour of Essex
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 25 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
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.