CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Hengist Field Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, but the home’s records were not always accurate or up to date.
This was an unannounced inspection on 9 July 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff. They reviewed care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, staff files, complaints, meetings and audits.
People told inspectors they felt safe and were treated kindly. Staff supported people with medicines, nutrition, health needs, personal care and activities. Inspectors also found that complaints were acted on and that people were involved in decisions about their care.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive were all rated Good. Well-led was Requires Improvement because some records were still inconsistent while a new electronic recording system was being introduced.
The home had improved since the previous inspection in 2018. It was no longer in breach of regulations, but inspectors said records needed to become consistently accurate and up to date.
Kind and respectful care
People spoke positively about staff. Inspectors observed staff offering choices, respecting privacy and supporting independence.
“We observed positive interactions between people and staff.” from the report
Improved nutrition support
The home had strengthened monitoring of weight, food and fluids since the previous inspection, with care plans and healthcare referrals in place.
“At this inspection, improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of Regulation 14.” from the report
Personalised activities
Activities were based on people's interests, and technology was used to help staff understand people's backgrounds and preferences.
“Every person's profile we viewed showed a high level of detail of their backgrounds and preferences.” from the report
Complaints were followed up
The home recorded complaints, investigated them and made changes when needed, including updating a care plan after a relative's complaint.
“The provider kept a record of complaints and these showed actions were taken to investigate issues and respond in line with policy.” from the report
Records were inconsistent
needs fixingSome care records were still being updated and, in two cases, did not match the care being delivered. Inspectors said this had not affected people, but it meant the home was not yet Good for Well-led.
“In two cases, information was not consistent with care delivery.” from the report
Some future wishes lacked detail
needs fixingInformation about some people's preferences and advance wishes, including end of life wishes, was incomplete while care plans were being updated.
“We identified instances where information about people's preferences and advanced wishes lacked detail” from the report
The environment needed further dementia-friendly improvements
minorInspectors identified areas where more signage would help people living with dementia. Redecoration and dementia-friendly improvements were planned.
“We identified areas where more signage would enable people living with dementia to orientate themselves.” from the report
- 01How do you check that electronic care records are accurate and match the care people receive?
- 02Have the two record inconsistencies identified by inspectors been corrected, and how do you prevent them happening again?
- 03How do you record and review each person's advance wishes and preferences for end of life care?
- 04What changes have been made to signage and dementia-friendly areas since the inspection?
- 05How do you use people's feedback, relatives' feedback and complaints to make changes?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions; the previous inspection was published on 5 September 2018. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 August 2019 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, September 2018
Hengist Field Care Centre is rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but nutrition, records and management systems needed improvement.
Inspectors visited without notice on 20, 23 and 24 July 2018. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, reviewed care and management records, observed care and checked information from other organisations.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Caring and Responsive care. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines, kind treatment, respect for privacy and dignity, personalised care, activities and support at the end of life.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Effective and Well-led. Some people's food and drink needs were not met, records were incomplete or inaccurate, and checks by managers did not always find problems. Two legal regulations were breached.
Staffing and call bells
There were enough staff to meet people's needs. Call bells were usually answered within five minutes, and staffing levels had increased since the previous inspection.
“At this inspection we found there were enough staff available to meet the needs of the people in the service.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff listening to people, showing compassion and respecting privacy, dignity and independence.
“People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion.” from the report
Personalised activities
People had individual activity plans based on their interests. Inspectors saw activities including music, exercise, games, pizza making and visits to a local school.
“People were supported to follow their interests and took part in daily activities in the service.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines were given safely by trained nurses whose competence had been checked. Staff explained medicines and respected people's decisions if they did not want them immediately.
“People received their medicines when they needed them from staff who had been trained and had their competency checked.” from the report
Food and drink records
seriousSome fluid charts were not totalled or checked, even when records showed that a person had drunk below the amount in their care plan. One person's fortified food had also not been provided.
“The failure to ensure people's nutrition and hydration needs are met is a continuing breach of Regulation 14 of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.” from the report
Incomplete care records
seriousRecords did not always show the care people had received. Examples included missing repositioning records and missing monthly pressure sore risk assessments.
“Failure to maintain accurate, complete and contemporaneous records in respect of each person” from the report
Management oversight
seriousAudits and other checks did not identify all the problems found by inspectors. Some agency staff were unclear about their role and did not systematically receive the same supervision as permanent staff.
“Governance systems were not always effective in ensuring shortfalls in service delivery were identified and rectified” from the report
- 01How do you now record and check daily fluid intake, and what action is taken when someone drinks less than the amount in their care plan?
- 02How are special diets, fortified food and nutritional supplements clearly passed to kitchen staff and checked at mealtimes?
- 03How do you make sure repositioning, skin checks and pressure sore risk assessments are recorded accurately and at the time care is given?
- 04What checks now identify incomplete or inaccurate care records before they affect someone's care?
- 05How are agency staff told about their roles, the home's procedures and its expectations for compassionate care?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises, care provided, records, staffing and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 September 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 Hengist Field Care Centre
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2019Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 December 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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 £1,260 a week. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.