CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hulton Care Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Medicines were not always managed or recorded safely. Risk assessments and infection control practices were also not consistently in place or followed.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received appropriate support with eating, drinking and healthcare. Staff had inductions, supervision and access to training, although capacity and DoLS paperwork needed improvement.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were described as kind and considerate. People’s dignity, privacy, equality and independence were respected.
- Responsive?
- Requires improvement
- Care plans were not always person centred and included duplicated or incorrect information. Complaints records might not have included all issues raised.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Quality checks had not identified several problems with medicines, risks, care plans and records. Feedback from staff and people was positive, but feedback from relatives was mixed.
What inspectors found, October 2022
Hulton Care Home is rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind and effective care but serious weaknesses in medicines, risk management, infection control and records.
This was an unannounced inspection carried out over several visits in July 2022. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and visiting professionals. They visited both floors and checked care records, medicines, recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good for effective and caring. People were treated kindly, supported with food and healthcare, and helped to stay involved in activities and relationships. Staffing levels were considered safe, and safeguarding procedures were being followed.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for safe, responsive and well-led care. Medicines were not always recorded safely. Risk assessments were missing or out of date. Infection control practices were not always followed, and care plans and other records were not consistently accurate or person centred.
The overall rating means the home was not consistently meeting the required standards and people faced an increased risk of harm. This was the first inspection since the service was registered under the current provider. The previous provider had been rated Good in 2018.
Kind and respectful staff
People said staff were very nice and inspectors saw care staff speaking kindly and considerately. Staff supported people’s dignity, privacy and independence.
“Care staff appeared kind and considerate when speaking to people.” from the report
Food and healthcare
People’s dietary needs and wishes were followed. Staff helped people access healthcare and worked with several health professionals.
“People were supported to maintain a balanced diet.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found staffing levels were safe, and people said there were enough staff available.
“Staffing levels were safe. People told us there are enough staff” from the report
Activities and family visits
People could take part in activities led by an activities coordinator and were supported to have visits from loved ones.
“People were supported to take part in activities.” from the report
Medicines
seriousTimes were not always recorded for time-sensitive medicines. Allergy information and instructions for medicines given when needed were also not always available.
“Medicines were not always managed safely or recorded accurately.” from the report
Risk assessments
seriousSome environmental and health-related risk assessments were missing, incomplete or out of date. This included choking, falls and moving and handling risks.
“Risks were not always being appropriately managed.” from the report
Infection control
seriousSome staff did not wear masks correctly during a COVID-19 case, and there was not always paperwork to support mask exemptions. Unidentified toiletries and unlocked rooms containing dangerous substances were also found.
“Infection prevention practices were not always safe.” from the report
Care records
needs fixingCare plans included repeated quotes, incorrect names and incorrect pronouns. Records did not always reflect people’s individual views and needs.
“People did not always receive person centred care.” from the report
Quality checks and records
seriousAudits had not identified several problems, and various records were incomplete, inaccurate, out of date or missing. This meant the home could not reliably show that care was being well managed.
“Quality assurance systems required further improvement.” from the report
Complaints recording
needs fixingThe complaints log showed one verbal complaint, but a relative said other issues had previously been raised and were not recorded. Inspectors asked the provider to improve how complaints were logged and acted on.
“We were not assured that this was accurate.” from the report
- 01What has changed to ensure every medicine administration, allergy detail and as-needed medicine instruction is recorded correctly?
- 02Which risk assessments are now in place for choking, falls, moving and handling, and environmental hazards?
- 03How do you check that staff follow infection control rules, including mask use and safe storage of dangerous substances?
- 04How are care plans checked to make sure they use the correct names and pronouns and reflect each person’s individual needs?
- 05How are complaints now recorded, investigated and reviewed by the management team?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control, with inspection activity from 07 July to 26 July 2022. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 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.
Every inspection of Hulton Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- October 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 May 2021.
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.