CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hawthorn House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, suitable recruitment checks, clear risk plans, safe medicines practice and infection control procedures. Staff knew how to respond to concerns about harm.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff received regular training and supervision. People received food and drinks suited to their needs and were supported with healthcare, including advice about choking risks.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind and respectful. They supported privacy, dignity, communication, independence and contact with important relationships.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences and were reviewed regularly. People were offered activities, trips and support with their individual interests.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a registered manager, open communication and audits covering areas such as medicines, equipment and safety. Action plans were used when improvements were identified.
What inspectors found, December 2018
Hawthorn House was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with no serious concerns.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 21 November 2018. The inspector and an expert-by-experience spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and the manager. They also observed care and checked care plans, medicines, maintenance and recruitment records.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. Inspectors found enough suitably checked staff, safe medicines practice, suitable food and healthcare support, kind care, personalised activities and good quality checks.
The rating stayed Good, as it had been at the previous inspection. The report says there was no evidence of serious risks or concerns. It also notes that the buildings were not originally designed in line with best practice guidance for choice, independence and inclusion, although people were being supported to make choices and take part in the local community.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and saw that medicines were given safely and recorded accurately.
“People were cared for by a sufficient number of staff who were suitably checked prior to commencing work.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff listened to people, understood verbal and non-verbal communication, and supported privacy, dignity and independence.
“Staff provided kind, considerate and compassionate care which recognised people's right to privacy, upheld their dignity and promoted their independence.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected individual preferences and needs. Staff supported people with activities, trips and interests that mattered to them.
“People received care which met their preferences as staff understood what they liked or disliked.” from the report
Good communication and oversight
Relatives and staff had opportunities to give feedback. The home used audits and action plans to monitor quality and make improvements.
“There was an open and transparent approach to managing the service which ensured staff felt supported and included.” from the report
Building design and inclusion
minorThe report says the home was not originally designed in line with best practice guidance on choice, independence and inclusion. Inspectors nevertheless found that people were being offered choices and encouraged to take part in the local community.
“The care service had not originally been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance.” from the report
Access to online training
minorThe manager said staff sometimes found online training difficult to access. Ask how this is now managed and how staff complete essential training.
“The registered manager explained that staff sometimes found it difficult to access online training and hoped this would provide them with additional training support.” from the report
- 01How do you support each person to make choices, develop independence and take part in the local community?
- 02How do staff complete essential training if online training is difficult to access?
- 03How are seizure, choking and other individual risks recorded and kept up to date?
- 04What activities, day trips and support for personal interests would be available for my relative?
- 05How would you involve our family in regular care plan reviews and decisions about future care?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, and all five ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 December 2018 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 House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 November 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Staffordshire
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 £1,230 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
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.