CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hawthorn Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Hawthorn Court was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection-control practice during a recent COVID-19 outbreak.
Inspectors visited on 21 February 2022 with short notice. This was a targeted inspection focused on infection prevention and control during a COVID-19 outbreak. They also asked about staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
The inspectors were assured that the home was using protective equipment safely, testing people and staff, managing visitors, and following infection-control guidance. The home was clean, tidy and spacious, with cleaning arrangements strengthened because of the outbreak.
People could keep in touch with relatives in different ways, and staff provided activities. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for most areas of care.
Safe use of PPE
Staff had the protective equipment they needed and used it correctly. They had also completed recent infection-control training.
“Staff had access to the PPE they needed and used it correctly, to help prevent the spread of infection.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was clean, tidy and spacious. Cleaning arrangements had been strengthened to manage the recent outbreak.
“The home was clean, tidy and spacious. The home had effective cleaning practices which had been enhanced to help manage the recent COVID-19 outbreak.” from the report
Contact and activities
People were supported to stay in contact with relatives in different ways. Staff also offered activities to keep people engaged.
“People were supported to maintain contact with relatives in various ways. Staff provided a range of activities to keep people engaged.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently managing staffing pressures linked to COVID-19, and what effect do they have on people's care?
- 02What arrangements are now in place if there is another infection outbreak?
- 03How do you currently manage visits, testing and PPE for relatives and other visitors?
- 04How will my relative be supported to keep in contact with family?
- 05What activities are available for people, including those living with dementia?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, with questions about COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was not rated and the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 March 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, April 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind care, but some records, fire safety paperwork and dining support needed improvement.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 26 February 2020. One inspector and an Expert-by-Experience spoke with people, relatives, staff and visiting professionals. They also observed care and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found a clean, comfortable home with kind staff, enough staff, safe medicine systems and good support from health professionals.
There were some areas to improve. An up-to-date fire risk assessment was not available, evacuation plans needed more regular review, and dining support was not always enough. Care records also needed more detail about people's communication, interests and person-centred care.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff knew people well and responded quickly when they became distressed.
“Staff interactions with people were kindly, encouraging and appropriate.” from the report
People felt safe
Risks were assessed and managed, staffing levels were monitored, and staff had safeguarding training. Medicines were ordered, stored and given through established systems.
“People were safe with staff support and staff were caring and approachable.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could join in activities, entertainment and trips outside the home. The home also had links with the local community and an intergenerational project.
“People had access to a range of activities along with entertainment and external trips.” from the report
Good management and feedback
People, relatives and staff said the management team was approachable and listened to them. Audits, meetings and complaint processes were in place.
“Regular audits were completed to monitor service provision and to ensure the safety of people who used the service.” from the report
Dining support
needs fixingMenus were not available in an accessible format, and people were not shown food choices when they no longer understood spoken information. In one dining room, staff did not always have enough time to encourage people to eat while food was hot or monitor what they ate.
“Some improvements were required to people's dining experience and to keep people, including people who lived with dementia, involved in decision making about their food.” from the report
Care records lacked detail
needs fixingSome records did not give enough information about people's interests, communication, facial or body language and signs of pain. This could make it harder for new staff to provide fully personalised care.
“More detailed information would ensure people received person-centred care, especially when they were no longer able to tell staff themselves.” from the report
Support when personal care is refused
needs fixingRecords showed that some people might refuse personal care, but risk assessments and care plans did not give staff guidance about how to respond.
“Risk assessments and care plans, were not in place to provide guidance to staff where people may refuse this care.” from the report
- 01Has the fire risk assessment now been completed, and how often are people's personal evacuation plans reviewed?
- 02How are people with dementia now shown or offered food choices in a way they can understand?
- 03How do staff record and recognise non-verbal signs of pain, distress or choice?
- 04What guidance is now in place when someone refuses personal care?
- 05How are people's previous interests and hobbies recorded and used to plan activities?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that looked at all five CQC questions and reviewed the home, care and management arrangements; all five ratings carried over as Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 April 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.
Every inspection of Hawthorn Court
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 May 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of South Tyneside
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 £950 to £1,140 a week. 34 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.