CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Highfield House Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed. This included visitors, admissions, protective equipment, testing, hygiene and outbreak planning.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not covered by this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Highfield House Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about its infection prevention and control measures.
Inspectors visited the home on 11 February 2021. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic. It focused on infection prevention and control.
Inspectors found the home clean and hygienic. Staff used health screening, temperature checks, personal protective equipment and regular testing. The home had enough protective equipment and followed guidance on visiting, shielding and social distancing.
Families were kept updated by phone, email and video calls. The home also recorded residents' lockdown activities in a book shared with relatives. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not provide an overall quality rating.
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and hygienic. Two infection control leads shared good practice.
“The home was clean and hygienic and the service had two infection control and prevention leads, who were responsible for sharing good practice.” from the report
Protective equipment
The home had enough protective equipment and staff were using it safely in line with national guidance.
“National guidance was followed on the use of personal protective equipment and the service had sufficient stock.” from the report
Family communication
Families received updates through several channels, including phone, email and video calls. The home also shared a record of residents' lockdown activities.
“There were good lines of communication in place, with families being updated by phone, email and videocalls.” from the report
Testing and risk checks
Residents and staff took part in regular COVID-19 testing and vaccination. Risk assessments were completed for people and staff in higher-risk groups.
“Staff and residents were taking part in regular covid 19 testing and the vaccination programme.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now for visitors and new admissions?
- 02How often are residents and staff tested, and what happens if someone tests positive?
- 03How do you make sure there is enough personal protective equipment available?
- 04What are the home's current arrangements for keeping families updated and supporting visits?
- 05When were the other areas of care last inspected and rated?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control within Safe; the service was inspected but not rated and the other questions were not covered. 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.
What inspectors found, December 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with no breaches reported.
This was an unannounced inspection on 6 and 7 November 2019. One inspector spoke with four people living there, a relative, the manager, staff and other members of the team. They also checked care records, medicines, staff files, audits and the building.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found suitable safeguarding and risk systems, safe medicines, enough staff, trained workers and a nutritious choice of food.
People were treated with kindness and dignity. Their care plans included their preferences and were reviewed. Activities were varied, complaints were handled, and managers used audits and meetings to improve the service.
The previous rating was Good, published in November 2018. The provider had changed its legal entity, so this was a planned inspection under CQC's new methodology. The report says the service was consistently managed and people experienced good care.
Safe medicines
Inspectors checked ordering, storage, administration and disposal. They found no errors in the medicines records and found staff were trained and checked for competence.
“The administration of medicines was safe. We checked the systems for ordering, storing, administering and disposing of medicines.” from the report
Good food and health support
People had a choice of meals and drinks. The home sought specialist advice where needed and helped people attend health appointments.
“People were supported to live healthy lives because they had access to professionals, a well-trained staff team and a choice of a nutritious diet.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew about people's lives, interests and preferences. Inspectors saw positive relationships and a friendly atmosphere.
“People were treated as individuals which helped protect their dignity.” from the report
Personalised activities
Activities were offered in groups and individually. They included music, exercise, games, outings and contact with the wider community.
“Activities were provided in groups, individually and tailored to gender.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff could share their views. Managers used audits and meetings to discuss concerns and improvements.
“People who used the service and relatives were able to air their views about how the service was run.” from the report
Palliative care arrangements
minorThe home did not provide palliative care directly at the time of the inspection. Staff had end-of-life training and the home had contacts with external professionals who could provide support if needed.
“The service did not currently provide palliative care.” from the report
- 01If my relative needs palliative care, which external professionals would support them and how would this be arranged?
- 02How would you maintain staffing levels if there were staff shortages or absences?
- 03How often would my relative's care plan be reviewed, and how would their family be involved?
- 04Which activities would be suitable for my relative's interests, abilities and communication needs?
- 05How would you support my relative to make choices if they could not make a particular decision independently?
This was a planned inspection of the newly registered service following a change in legal entity; all five key questions were rated, and the previous Good rating from 2018 helped inform the inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 December 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.
Every inspection of Highfield House Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2019GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 November 2018.
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 Rochdale
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. 92 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
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.