CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Hazelgrove Court Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Requires Improvement; inspectors found people were generally protected and cared for, but cleanliness and management checks were not good enough.
This was an unannounced focused inspection. Inspectors visited on 21 March 2023, spoke with people, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Requires Improvement overall, with the Safe and Well-led areas also rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found dirty and cluttered areas, and said infection control practices were not always followed. Some daily personal care records and staff training records were incomplete.
There were also positive findings. People told inspectors they felt safe, medicines were managed safely, risks were assessed, and staff were recruited with appropriate checks. Staff and relatives described an open and supportive culture.
The home had improved since the previous inspection, including care plans and risk management. However, the provider remained in breach of Regulation 17 because its checks had not led to effective action on cleanliness, records and training.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff knew how to report concerns, and systems were in place to protect people from abuse.
“People told us they felt safe.” from the report
Medicines were managed safely
Medicine records and stocks were checked, medicines were stored safely, and people said they received medicines on time.
“Medicines were managed safely. Medicines administration records were up to date and accurate.” from the report
Risks were assessed
Care plans included detailed information about risks such as skin damage, diabetes, moving and handling, and nutrition. Accidents and incidents were reviewed to reduce the chance of recurrence.
“Risks to people's health and well-being had been identified and assessed.” from the report
Supportive culture
Staff said they could speak openly with managers about concerns. People, relatives and professionals also gave positive feedback about the staff and management.
“The registered manager created an environment which was open and inclusive.” from the report
Cleanliness and clutter
seriousInspectors found dirty and untidy areas, including food stains and corridors needing cleaning. Cluttered areas and an uncomfortable shower room affected some people's wellbeing.
“The cleanliness of the home was of a poor standard.” from the report
Infection control
seriousStaff had received infection control training, but inspectors saw that the policy was not always followed. Poor cleanliness increased the risk of infection.
“Poor cleanliness increased the risk of infection.” from the report
Incomplete personal care records
needs fixingDaily records did not always show the personal hygiene support people had received. This meant managers could not effectively monitor personal care.
“Daily records for personal hygiene care were not completed accurately.” from the report
Training records
needs fixingThere was no recorded evidence of recent catheter or wound care training, even though staff said they had completed it. This made it harder for managers to monitor staff performance.
“The registered manager had not ensured staff training was accurately recorded.” from the report
Shortage of domestic staff
needs fixingStaff and the registered manager said there were not enough domestic staff, which affected the home's ability to keep it clean. Agency staff were also still being used, although recruitment had reduced this slightly.
“The registered manager told us that the service did not have enough domestic staff, and this was impacting on the ability to keep the service clean.” from the report
- 01What has been done to remove the clutter and improve cleaning in the areas inspectors found dirty or untidy?
- 02How do you now check that infection control procedures are being followed in practice?
- 03How are daily personal hygiene records checked for accuracy and completeness?
- 04What evidence can you show that staff have recent catheter and wound care training?
- 05How many domestic staff are now in post, and how often are agency staff being used?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led; the other key question ratings were carried over from the last comprehensive inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 May 2023 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, March 2022
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found staffing, care records and management checks were not consistently strong enough to keep people safe.
This was an unannounced focused inspection after concerns about staffing and the management of people's care needs. Inspectors visited on three dates, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
Inspectors found there were not always enough regular staff. High use of agency staff added pressure, and agency workers did not always know people's needs or follow their care plans. Care records and risk assessments were not always up to date, so staff could miss changes in people's health.
Management checks had not found or acted on these problems quickly enough. The home breached the rules on safe care and treatment and good governance. The provider put an action plan in place, increased staffing and strengthened the leadership team, but the overall rating changed from Good in 2018 to Requires Improvement.
Kind and caring staff
People and most relatives said staff worked hard and genuinely cared about them. Regular staff knew people well.
“People and most relatives told us staff worked hard to help support people and genuinely cared about them.” from the report
Medicines generally managed safely
Inspectors found medicines were generally managed safely, and people said they received them on time. Some paper records still needed checking during the move to an electronic system.
“People told us they received their medicines on time.” from the report
Infection control measures
Inspectors found personal protective equipment, staff training and cleaning arrangements in place. The home followed infection control procedures during outbreaks and visiting followed government guidance.
“PPE was available throughout the home. Staff had received training in donning and doffing. Cleaning regimes were in place.” from the report
Immediate improvement action
The provider accepted the concerns and introduced an action plan, increased staffing and strengthened the leadership presence. New staff had also been recruited.
“The provider listened to the feedback given and took immediate action. Additional staffing levels were introduced, new staff had been recruited.” from the report
Not enough regular staff
seriousPeople and relatives said there were not always enough staff. Some people spent longer in bed and were not always offered baths or showers, while regular staff faced extra pressure from high agency use.
“People and relatives told us there was not always enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Out-of-date risk information
seriousCare records did not always describe people's current health needs or risks, including choking and falls. Staff did not always identify or act on changes quickly enough.
“Care records for people's specific health needs were not always up to date to guide staff on how to manage and monitor those needs safely.” from the report
Weak management checks
seriousThe provider's monitoring systems had not identified important problems with care, incidents, staffing, training and the home environment. This meant problems were not consistently addressed promptly.
“The provider's quality monitoring systems and processes had failed to ensure there was suitable oversight of the home.” from the report
Agency staff deployment
seriousAgency staff did not always know the needs of the people they supported or follow care plans. The provider needed to improve how agency workers were deployed and managed.
“However, the deployment and management of agency staff needed to be reviewed to ensure they were following people's care plans and relieving pressures on regular staff.” from the report
Some areas needed cleaning and repair
needs fixingSome areas needed decluttering, cleaning schedules did not cover all equipment and parts of the home and equipment looked worn. The provider needed to improve its checks of the environment.
“Some areas of the home required de-cluttering, cleaning schedules needed reviewing to include all equipment and, the home required refurbishment as some areas and equipment were looking worn and tired.” from the report
- 01How many regular staff are now working on each shift, and how are staffing levels matched to residents' needs?
- 02How do you make sure agency staff read and follow each person's current care plan?
- 03What has changed to keep risk assessments and care records up to date, especially for choking, falls and changes in health?
- 04How are accidents and incidents now reviewed, and how are lessons shared with staff and relatives?
- 05What progress has been made with the action plan, including the manager's CQC registration and the quality checks?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the report says ratings for the other questions were carried over from the previous inspection published on 25 August 2018. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 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.
Every inspection of Hazelgrove Court Care Home
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- May 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2022Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 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
31 live-in carers within about an hour of Redcar and Cleveland
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 £1,280 a week. 29 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“I found Alison to be kind , caring helpful concencious... Alison has a heart of gold”
“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.