CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Haydon View Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, effective risk checks and generally safe medicines management. A small number of staff needed reminders about correct PPE use and hand hygiene.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found clearer roles, updated records, new monitoring processes and a range of quality checks. People, relatives and staff described the home as well run and supportive.
What inspectors found, December 2022
Haydon View Residential Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind care, safer medicines and improved management, with minor reminders needed about infection procedures.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 29 and 30 November 2022. One inspector and an expert by experience spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They reviewed care records, medicine records, recruitment files and management checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk checks and medicines that were generally managed safely. The home was clean and tidy, although a small number of staff needed reminding about face masks and hand hygiene.
The home had improved since its previous inspection, when it was rated Requires Improvement and breached regulations about safe care and treatment and good governance. At this inspection, the provider was no longer in breach. The Effective, Caring and Responsive areas were not inspected directly, so their previous ratings were used to calculate the overall Good rating.
Kind and caring staff
People and relatives described staff as extremely kind and caring. Inspectors also found that staff responded promptly to requests for help.
“People told us they were cared for by extremely kind and caring staff.” from the report
Improved medicines management
Medicines were managed safely and people received them on time and as prescribed. A refurbished medicines room supported this improvement.
“People received their medicines on time and as prescribed.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Recruitment checks included references and DBS vetting.
“There was enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Better oversight
The home had updated records, new processes and regular audits to monitor care and improve quality. This addressed problems found at the previous inspection.
“Records had been updated and new processes put in place to enhance the monitoring of daily care.” from the report
Open communication
People, relatives and staff said managers were accessible and supportive. The home sought views through surveys, reviews and meetings.
“The registered manager and deputy manager promoted an open and honest culture and led by example.” from the report
PPE and hand hygiene reminders
minorA small number of staff needed reminding about the correct use of face masks and washing or gelling hands. Management addressed this immediately.
“A small number of staff needed to be reminded about the correct use of face masks and washing or gelling hands.” from the report
A few medicine records needed updating
minorInspectors found a very small number of medicine records that needed updating. This was dealt with immediately.
“There were a very small number of medicine records which needed updating and this was addressed immediately.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that all staff use face masks correctly and wash or gel their hands?
- 02How do you check that medicine records stay accurate and up to date?
- 03What changes have you kept in place since the previous inspection's breaches about safe care and treatment and good governance?
- 04How are fire safety procedures, personal emergency evacuation plans and fire drills reviewed?
- 05How will you support visiting and essential caregiver arrangements if there is another infection outbreak?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection control; Effective, Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 December 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, February 2022
Haydon View Residential Home is rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care and enough staff, but serious weaknesses in medicines, infection control and oversight.
This was an announced, focused inspection on 25 and 27 January 2022. It began because the home was experiencing a COVID-19 outbreak and was widened to look at Safe and Well-led.
Inspectors spoke with eight people and contacted six relatives. They checked every person's medicines record, staff recruitment records, accidents, care records and quality checks. They found that medicines were not always managed safely and infection control procedures were not robust.
People were described as safe and cared for by kind staff. There were enough staff, recruitment checks were robust and relatives were positive about the care. However, quality checks had not found important problems, so the overall rating fell from Good at the previous inspection to Requires Improvement.
The report says the provider breached Regulation 12 on safe care and treatment and Regulation 17 on good governance. The provider was asked for an action plan, and the CQC said it would monitor progress.
Kind and caring staff
People and relatives spoke positively about the staff. Inspectors saw staff providing kind and caring support.
“People were cared for in a warm and homely environment.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's individual needs. Staff had time to sit and talk with people.
“There were enough staff to meet people's individual needs.” from the report
Safeguarding
People felt safe and were protected from abuse. Staff understood how to respond to behaviours that might challenge them.
“People were safeguarded from abuse and felt safe.” from the report
Recruitment checks
The home carried out checks before employing staff to make sure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people.
“Safe and robust recruitment checks were in place.” from the report
Working with health professionals
The home had good working relationships with local GPs and community nursing teams, and involved them when people needed extra support.
“We have a good working relationship with the home.” from the report
Medicines were not always managed safely
seriousSome medicines had not been signed for, instructions were not always followed and information for 'as required' medicines was missing. The medicine room was also cluttered and not clean.
“Medicines were not always managed safely.” from the report
Weak infection control
seriousStaff did not always wear or remove protective equipment correctly. Some masks were unsuitable or handled without hand sanitising, and some high-touch areas needed repainting so they could be cleaned properly.
“The service did not have robust infection control procedures in place.” from the report
Management checks missed problems
seriousQuality checks did not identify the medicines and infection control shortfalls found by inspectors. Records were not always complete.
“The provider failed to maintain accurate, complete and contemporaneous records and have effective systems to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service.” from the report
Some risk records needed updating
needs fixingA small number of risk assessments needed attention. Bed settings for some special mattresses were not recorded or monitored, although inspectors found no impact on people.
“We found a small number of risk assessments which needed addressed and the registered manager confirmed this would be done immediately.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to medicines recording, 'as required' medicine protocols and checks that medicines arrive and test results are received?
- 02How are staff now trained and checked to make sure protective equipment is put on, worn and removed correctly?
- 03How do your quality checks now identify problems with medicines, infection control and record keeping?
- 04Have all risk assessments and mattress settings been updated and are they now regularly monitored?
- 05What progress has been made on the action plan requested by the CQC?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, mainly covering infection control, medicines and management systems; the other key-question ratings were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 February 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.
Every inspection of Haydon View Residential Home
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2022Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Haydon View Residential Home →
- February 2022Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Haydon View Residential Home →
- February 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 October 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
23 live-in carers within about an hour of Northumberland
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 £1,190 a week. 20 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
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.