CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hemmet House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines systems and effective infection control.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care was planned around people's needs and choices. Staff were trained and supported, and people were helped with food, drink, health conditions and access to healthcare.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were happy with their care and staff were kind, patient and respectful. People were involved in decisions and supported to maintain their privacy and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care records reflected people's preferences and were reviewed regularly. People were supported with communication, activities, outings and relationships with family and friends.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The registered manager understood people's needs and had oversight of the home. Audits, feedback systems and checks were used to monitor and improve quality and safety.
What inspectors found, October 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas they checked.
This was an unannounced inspection on 4 October 2022. One inspector spoke with six people living at the home, two relatives and staff. They also observed care and checked care records, medicines records, recruitment files, training records and management records.
Inspectors found that people were safe, their medicines were managed properly and there were enough trained staff. The home was clean, followed infection control measures and carried out checks on its premises and equipment.
People were treated kindly and with dignity. They were involved in decisions about their care, supported to stay healthy and encouraged to take part in activities they enjoyed. The registered manager had effective checks in place to monitor the quality and safety of the home. All five areas were rated Good, the same as at the previous inspection published in February 2018.
Safety and medicines
Inspectors found that risks were assessed, staff knew how to keep people safe and medicines were given as prescribed.
“Our checks of stocks and records showed people consistently received the medicines prescribed to them.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People were comfortable with staff, who knew them well and supported them patiently without rushing them.
“Staff were kind and patient when supporting people.” from the report
Choice and independence
People helped decide how their care was provided and were encouraged to do as much as they could for themselves.
“People had choice and control about how they wanted to receive care and support from staff.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People took part in activities, courses, outings and holidays linked to their interests. Friends and relatives could visit without unnecessary restrictions.
“People were supported to take part in varied activities and pursue interests that were important to them.” from the report
Management and oversight
The home had an experienced registered manager and regular checks were used to monitor care quality and safety.
“The provider maintained a system of audits and checks to monitor and review the safety and quality of the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and record my relative's specific risks and preferences before they move in?
- 02What activities, college courses, outings or holidays could my relative take part in?
- 03How will you involve my relative and our family in regular care reviews and decisions?
- 04How do you check that medicines continue to be given safely and as prescribed?
- 05What plans would be made if my relative later needed end of life care?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control; nobody at the home needed end of life care at the time. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 October 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 2018
Hemmet House was rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with safety issues about windows and hot water fixed immediately after the visit.
This was an unannounced inspection on 10 January 2018. The inspector spoke with six people, the registered manager, four care workers and two relatives. They reviewed care records, staff records and records about how the home was managed.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse, received their medicines as prescribed, and had enough trained staff to support them.
People were involved in decisions about their care and daily lives. Staff knew their needs, communication methods and preferences. People were supported with health care, food, activities, friendships and developing independence.
Inspectors found that some window restrictors were unsafe and hot water from two outlets was too hot. The provider fitted new restrictors, checked and adjusted all hot water outlets, and introduced daily temperature checks immediately after the inspection.
Personalised support
People were involved in planning their care and their choices were recorded. Staff had detailed information about how each person communicated and wanted to be supported.
“People continued to be actively involved in planning and making decisions about their care and support.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw warm interactions. Staff gave people time, respected their privacy and supported them in a calm and considerate way.
“People were not rushed and given the time they needed to make choices or to move around the premises.” from the report
Independence and activities
People were supported to take part in college, voluntary work, social groups, sport, holidays and everyday tasks such as cooking and laundry.
“People continued to be supported to undertake a wide range of activities, outings and events to meet their social and physical needs.” from the report
Medicines and staffing
Inspectors found enough staff on duty, appropriate recruitment checks and medicines being stored and given safely.
“People received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Window safety
seriousSome windows had restrictors that were missing, incorrectly fitted or allowed openings larger than the recommended safe level. New restrictors were fitted immediately after the inspection.
“In three people's bedrooms we found restrictors were not fitted correctly and/or window openings exceeded the Health and Safety Executive's (HSE) recommended safe level of 100 millimetres.” from the report
Hot water temperature
seriousHot water from two outlets appeared to be above the recommended safe temperature, creating a possible scalding risk. All outlets were checked and adjusted after the inspection, with daily checks introduced.
“The provider also sent us evidence that temperature checks had been undertaken of all hot water outlets and adjusted so that these did not exceed the HSE's recommended safe level.” from the report
- 01How are the new window restrictors checked, especially in bedrooms?
- 02How are daily hot water temperature checks recorded and reviewed?
- 03What happens if a window restrictor or hot water check shows a problem?
- 04How will my relative be involved in planning and reviewing their care and activities?
- 05How will staff support my relative's communication, choices and independence?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including care, staffing, records, premises, medicines and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 February 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 Hemmet House
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Sutton
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. 81 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Terry has been of invaluable help to our family while working as a part-time live-in carer for our mother for approximately 6 months”
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.