CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Hazelmere Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable recruitment checks, and effective infection prevention arrangements.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used in calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Management systems did not identify some missing or incomplete care plans and risk assessments. Staff knew people's needs and managed the risks safely at the time, and the home took immediate action.
What inspectors found, June 2023
Hazelmere Nursing Home is rated Good overall, but inspectors found gaps in care records and rated the service Requires Improvement for being well-led.
Inspectors visited unannounced on 15 and 17 May 2023. One inspector looked around the home, observed care, spoke with people, visitors and staff, and reviewed care records, medicines, recruitment and management documents.
The home was found to be safe. There were enough staff, medicines were handled safely, recruitment checks were completed, and the home was clean and well maintained. Staff understood safeguarding and supported people with day-to-day choices.
The main weakness was management checking. Some care plans and risk assessments did not contain enough detail about individual health needs, including diabetes and use of suction equipment. The home took immediate action and sent CQC an action plan.
The overall rating remained Good. Safe was rated Good, while well-led remained Requires Improvement. The other key question ratings were not inspected during this visit and were carried over from the previous inspection.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough suitably trained and experienced staff to meet people's needs. People said staff responded promptly when they used the call bell.
“There were enough suitably qualified, competent, skilled, and experienced staff to support people safely.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored, administered and disposed of safely. Staff who gave medicines had the required training and had been checked as competent.
“We observed staff administering medicines safely to people ensuring they were offered the medicines, given time to take them in the way that they preferred and signed for once they were taken.” from the report
Kind culture
People and relatives described staff as kind and respectful. Inspectors observed positive interactions between people and staff.
“People told us that the staff culture was friendly and that all staff engaged with them positively.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable arrangements to prevent and manage infections, including using protective equipment safely.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Incomplete health risk records
needs fixingSome care plans and risk assessments did not give staff enough written information about individual health needs. Examples included diabetes, use of suction equipment and tube feeding.
“Care plans, and risk assessments, did not contain sufficient detailed information to make sure staff were aware of what they should do to manage all risks for people.” from the report
Audits missed problems
needs fixingThe home's quality checks had not identified the record-keeping gaps found during the inspection. Inspectors said this could have created a risk if staff had not already known people's needs.
“The systems and processes to monitor quality and safety had not been fully effective in protecting people from the potential risk of harm.” from the report
- 01Have all individual health risks, including diabetes, use of suction equipment and tube feeding, now been added to care plans and risk assessments?
- 02What checks now make sure care records contain enough detail for staff to provide safe care?
- 03What actions in the immediate action plan have been completed, and how is progress being checked?
- 04How are people and their relatives involved when risks and choices about care are reviewed?
- 05How will you make sure future audits identify missing or incomplete care information?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led; the other key question ratings were not inspected and were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 June 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 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control and COVID-19 safety measures were in place.
The CQC made an unannounced, targeted inspection on 29 January 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control because of the response to coronavirus outbreaks in care homes.
Inspectors found the home was clean and well maintained. They were assured that the home used PPE safely, carried out regular testing, followed social distancing rules and had arrangements to manage infections.
The home was closed to most visitors at the time, apart from people visiting for palliative or end of life care. Staff helped residents keep in touch with families by telephone and video calls.
This inspection was not a full assessment of the home. The service was inspected but not rated, and only infection prevention and control was examined.
Clean and well maintained
The home had regular cleaning during the day, including cleaning of high-touch areas. Cleaning schedules were in place.
“The home was clean and well maintained. There was regular cleaning throughout the day and this included high-touch areas.” from the report
Safe use of PPE
Staff had enough PPE, received COVID-19 training and were seen using PPE and other infection control practices correctly.
“Staff were seen to be following correct infection prevention and control (IPC) practices.” from the report
Contact with families
Although most visitors were not allowed at the time, staff supported residents to stay in contact with families by phone and video calls.
“Staff supported people to remain in contact with their families through phone and video calls.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What are the current visiting arrangements, and how do they differ from those in place during this inspection?
- 02How are new residents tested and supported during any isolation period?
- 03How often are residents and staff tested now?
- 04How will you support my relative to keep in touch with family if visits are restricted?
- 05What activities and communal meals are currently available for residents who prefer not to stay in their rooms?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 March 2021 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 Hazelmere Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- June 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2018Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 May 2017.
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
19 live-in carers within about an hour of East Sussex
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 £1,000 to £1,400 a week. 13 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“When he point blank refused to go into hospital for a life saving blood transfusion she talked him through the situation and agreed to go in the ambulance with him and stayed until he was settled.”
“Una felt safe, secure and loved in her time with Debbie which is a gift that I am eternally grateful for.”
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.