CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hawkhurst
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe. Inspectors found safe recruitment, enough staff, effective risk management, clean premises and safe medicines systems.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and staff had suitable training and support. People were offered choices about food and received help to access healthcare.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed treating people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were supported to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised, regularly reviewed and updated when needs changed. Activities, community outings, visiting arrangements and end-of-life support were available, although one person wanted more going on in the main lounge.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had visible management, regular meetings and systems for gathering feedback and checking care quality. Inspectors found a positive and open culture.
What inspectors found, July 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with only minor concerns about care-plan awareness and activities.
This was an unannounced inspection on 18 June 2019. The inspectors spoke with six people, two relatives and staff. They looked around the home and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was supporting 22 people and could support up to 26. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable training and good support with food, healthcare and decision-making. People described staff as kind, respectful and caring.
All five CQC areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous inspection rating was also Good, published on 20 December 2016. The report says the home will continue to be monitored through the usual re-inspection programme.
Kind and respectful care
People described staff as kind and good listeners. Inspectors saw sensitive and caring interactions and found that privacy and dignity were respected.
“We observed interactions from staff that were kind, sensitive and caring.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's choices, wishes and preferences. Staff knew people well and supported them to make decisions about their daily lives.
“Care plans set out how to meet people's needs in a personalised way and reflected people's choices, wishes and preferences and things that were important to them.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were ordered and supplied on time. Staff had training and competency checks, and audits were used to identify errors or concerns.
“Medicines were managed safely.” from the report
Open management
The registered manager was visible and invited people and relatives to share views. Meetings, surveys and audits were used to improve the home.
“The registered manager was a visible presence in the service, who operated an open-door policy.” from the report
Care-plan awareness
minorSome people did not know whether they had a care plan. Inspectors still found that the plans reviewed were personalised and kept up to date.
“People did not always know if they had a care plan in place or not.” from the report
Activities in the main lounge
minorPeople generally said they were happy with the activities, including music and outings. However, one person felt there was not enough happening in the main lounge.
“The main lounge could do with more going on.” from the report
- 01How will you make sure every person understands whether they have a care plan and what it says?
- 02What activities are currently offered in the main lounge, and how do you respond when people ask for more?
- 03How do you make sure medicines remain safely ordered, administered and audited?
- 04How will you involve my relative and our family in reviewing care and preferences?
- 05What support is available if my relative's needs change or they require end-of-life care?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, as well as the premises and care provided; the previous overall rating was Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 July 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, December 2016
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards decisions still pending.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 15 and 16 November 2016. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, staff, relatives and health professionals. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse, medicines were managed safely, staff were trained and care plans were individual and kept up to date.
People described staff as kind and helpful. Inspectors saw respectful interactions, choices about daily life, suitable activities and systems for handling complaints and checking quality. The report also says that some Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards decisions were still awaited because of a reported backlog.
Safe medicines
Inspectors observed medicines being given safely and found accurate records for the 10 people whose records were checked. Staff training and competency checks were in place.
“We looked at ten medicines administration records (MARs) and found they had been completed accurately.” from the report
Kind relationships
People and visitors spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw polite, professional interactions and found no breaches of privacy or dignity.
“We observed there were good interactions between staff and people who used the service.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's preferences, routines, hobbies and life stories. Staff supported people to make choices and retain independence where possible.
“Plans of care were personalised to each person and recorded their likes and dislikes, choices, preferred routines, activities and hobbies.” from the report
Open management
Managers were available and approachable. The home used meetings, surveys and audits to identify and make improvements.
“The registered manager conducted audits regularly.” from the report
Pending legal decisions
minorAt the inspection, 15 people were waiting for decisions to renew existing Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards authorisations and three were waiting for first assessments. The manager said there was a backlog and that decisions would be processed as soon as possible.
“15 people were awaiting a decision to renew an already existing DoLS.” from the report
- 01What is the current position of the 15 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards renewals and three first assessments that were pending?
- 02Have the company’s medicines policies been updated to include the NICE guidance mentioned in the report?
- 03What are the usual staffing levels at weekends and overnight, compared with the 21 people living at the home?
- 04Which activities are currently available, and how are people’s individual interests and preferences used to plan them?
- 05How are care plans reviewed when someone’s health or support needs change?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five areas, following a September inspection at which the service met all the regulations inspected. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 December 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 Hawkhurst
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 January 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Blackburn with Darwen
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. 91 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
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.