CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hatzfeld House
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and person-centred care, but some records, language and activities needed improvement.
Inspectors visited over two days in November 2019. The first day was unannounced. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals, and checked care records, medicines and safety records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were generally safe, supported by trained staff and treated with kindness. Medicines were managed safely, and people had access to health professionals and activities.
Inspectors found some areas to improve. Cleaning schedules were incomplete, records of people's dietary needs were not available to all staff, and some language used about people was not dignified. Activities were not always organised when the activities coordinator was away, although action was taken during the inspection.
The previous overall rating was Outstanding. Caring, Responsive and Well-led had each fallen from Outstanding to Good. Good means inspectors found the service consistently met the required standards, but it was not judged to be outstanding at this inspection.
People felt safe
People said they felt safe, staff responded quickly to call bells and there were enough staff to meet people's needs.
“People felt safe living at the home and when staff supported them.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Staff gave medicines safely and according to people's preferences. Records showed when medicines were taken or refused, and medicines were stored safely.
“Staff administered medicines in a safe way and in accordance with people's preferences.” from the report
Kind and inclusive care
Staff understood people's wishes and supported diverse needs and choices. Inspectors saw positive relationships and an inclusive approach.
“Staff were particularly strong at supporting people's diverse needs and choices; they empowered them to make informed choices which had a positive impact on their lives.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in care decisions and encouraged to make choices about daily routines, personal care and activities.
“People were provided with person-centred care and were encouraged and empowered to make decisions about their own lives.” from the report
Open management
The management team welcomed feedback, acted on concerns and used quality checks and action plans to improve care.
“Quality assurance processes were effective and helped the provider and registered manager assure themselves that people received safe, dignified care.” from the report
Incomplete cleaning records
minorSome cleaning schedules had not been completed during the renovations. Inspectors judged that the cleaning regime was still effective.
“We did note some cleaning schedules had not been completed since the renovations at the home had begun.” from the report
Dietary information was not available
needs fixingThe cook understood people's dietary needs but could not show records of them. This could make it harder for other staff to provide meals safely when the cook was absent.
“The cook had a good understanding or people's dietary requirements; however, when we asked them to produce records to show these requirements they were unable to do so.” from the report
Undignified language
needs fixingInspectors heard staff use terms and comments about people that were not respectful, although these examples were described as few.
“We did observe and hear staff referring to people in a manner that could be deemed undignified.” from the report
Activities were not always organised
needs fixingWhen the activities coordinator was away, there was no organised replacement and there were periods with little activity. The manager corrected this on the second inspection day.
“Whilst some staff did engage with people, this was not organised and there were periods of the day when little activity was taking place.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure every staff member can see and follow each person's dietary requirements?
- 02What arrangements are now in place to provide activities when the activities coordinator is away?
- 03How do you monitor and address the language staff use when speaking about people?
- 04What renovation work has been completed since the inspection, including the ensuite facilities and environmental safety changes?
- 05How do you check that cleaning schedules are completed and kept up to date?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, the premises and the care provided; the first day was unannounced and the inspection took place over two days. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 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.
What inspectors found, May 2017
Rated Outstanding; inspectors found safe, effective care with especially kind, responsive and well-led support.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 30 March 2017. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff, managers and health and social care professionals. They reviewed care records, staff records and other records about how the home was run.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Effective. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, risk assessments, safeguarding training, safe medicines processes and emergency plans. Staff were trained, supervised and supported people with their health, food, drink and decisions.
The home was rated Outstanding for Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found very kind and respectful care, detailed personal support, meaningful activities, strong links with the local community and a management team that encouraged feedback and continual improvement.
The overall rating of Outstanding means inspectors judged the care to be exceptional in several areas and consistently very good overall. The report says 42 people were living at the home at the time of the inspection.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and saw call bells answered promptly. Medicines records, storage and administration were checked and found to be safe.
“People told us they felt there were enough staff in place to support them when they needed it and on the whole, staff responded to their nursing call bells quickly.” from the report
Well-trained staff
Staff had induction, ongoing training, supervision and appraisals. Inspectors found that training was up to date and staff understood how to support people effectively.
“Staff told us and records showed that they received a comprehensive induction and on-going training programme.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff's kindness and patience. Inspectors saw staff paying close attention to comfort, privacy, dignity and personal choice.
“People were supported by staff who were very kind and caring and treated them with respect and dignity.” from the report
Personalised support and activities
Care records included people's life histories, routines, goals and ambitions. Activities were shaped around what people wanted, including outings, hobbies and involvement in the home.
“People's care records had a strong, person centred approach, where people were empowered to achieve their goals and ambitions.” from the report
Strong leadership and improvement
The management team encouraged people, relatives and staff to give feedback. The home used meetings, surveys, newsletters and quality checks to act on suggestions and improve the service.
“There were a number of quality assurance processes in place that regularly assessed the quality and effectiveness of the support provided” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and review my relative's individual risks, including falls, medicines, diet and emergency evacuation?
- 02How do you assess people's dependency needs and adjust staffing when those needs change?
- 03How would you support my relative's communication, interests, routines, religion and cultural or personal preferences?
- 04How are people's goals and care plans reviewed, and how are families involved in those reviews?
- 05How do you make sure people can take part in activities and outings, including those who need extra support or prefer individual activities?
This was an unannounced inspection covering the overall service and all five CQC questions, with ratings given for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 May 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. The report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
Every inspection of Hatzfeld House
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2019Goodcurrent ratingdown from OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2017Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 March 2011.
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
75 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottinghamshire
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. 63 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
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.