CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hemlington Hall
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable risk management and safe medicines arrangements. People could take positive risks and retain freedom and choice.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was used when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. They understood individual communication styles and supported people to make decisions about their care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and focused on what mattered to each person. Staff supported activities, relationships, communication needs and the development of everyday living skills.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive, person-centred culture and effective management oversight. People, relatives, staff and professionals were involved in reviewing and improving care.
What inspectors found, January 2024
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with the overall rating based partly on earlier inspection findings.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 6 December 2023. Inspectors looked at safe, caring, responsive and well-led care. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives, health professionals and staff, and reviewed care, medicines, staffing and management records.
The home was rated Good in all four areas inspected. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and respect, supported to make choices, and helped to build independence. Staff knew people well and supported their interests, relationships and communication needs.
The inspection was partly prompted by concerns about care, support and staffing. Inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from these concerns. The overall rating remains Good, and the last inspection in 2019 was also Good. Any areas not inspected used ratings from the previous inspection.
Choice and independence
Staff focused on what people could do and helped them try new experiences, learn skills and become more independent.
“People had the opportunity to try new experiences, develop new skills and gain independence” from the report
Consistent staff
Low staff turnover meant people were supported by staff who knew their needs and preferences well.
“Staff turnover was very low, which supported people to receive consistent care from staff who knew them well.” from the report
Personalised communication
People had individual communication plans, and staff took time to understand how each person communicated.
“People had individual communication plans that detailed effective and preferred methods of communication, including the approach to use for different situations.” from the report
Safe support
Inspectors found appropriate risk management, enough staff and safe medicines systems. The home also supported people to receive visitors without restrictions.
“People lived safely and free from unwarranted restrictions because the service assessed, monitored and managed safety well.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What building improvements have started, and what work is still planned?
- 02How will you support my relative to take positive risks while keeping them safe?
- 03How will staff use my relative's communication plan in daily care and during times of distress?
- 04How do you make sure there are enough staff for one-to-one activities and community visits?
- 05How will my relative and our family be involved in reviewing their care and giving feedback?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Caring, Responsive and Well-led only; ratings for areas not inspected were carried forward from the previous inspection when calculating the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 January 2024 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 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured the home had safe infection control during the pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 26 January 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control because of the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing infections, using personal protective equipment safely, managing visitors and admissions, supporting testing, and following shielding and social distancing guidance.
Staff supported people's choices, independence and emotional wellbeing. People helped plan safe activities and were supported to keep in touch with relatives and friends, including through FaceTime.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall quality rating.
Infection control
The home had systems to reduce infection risks. Staff were trained in PPE and hand hygiene, and managers checked that procedures were followed.
“Staff had undertaken training in putting on and taking off PPE, hand hygiene and other Covid-19 related training.” from the report
Choice and independence
Staff continued to support people's choices, control and independence while following infection control guidance.
“Staff ensured they continually maximised people's choice, control and independence in a safe and inclusive environment whilst also following national infection prevention and control (IPC) guidance.” from the report
Contact with relatives
People were supported to maintain relationships with relatives and friends in different ways during the pandemic.
“Staff were supporting people to maintain contacts with their relatives and friends through a range of different format.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How often are each person's Covid-19 care plan and risk assessment reviewed?
- 02How are relatives supported to keep in contact with people, including through video calls or visits?
- 03How do managers check that staff continue to use PPE and follow hand hygiene procedures correctly?
- 04How are people supported to understand admission and isolation procedures?
- 05How are safe activities planned with people while infection control measures remain in place?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 February 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 Hemlington Hall
4 rated inspections over 9 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2024Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 December 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
35 live-in carers within about an hour of Middlesbrough
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. 31 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.