CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hutton Manor Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2023
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind care but gaps in care records, risk management and legal safeguards.
This was the home’s first inspection since it registered. Inspectors visited without notice on 24 November 2022. They reviewed care records, staff files and management records, and spoke with people, relatives and staff.
People told inspectors they felt safe and were treated kindly. Staff were respectful, supported people’s independence and helped them with food and drink. The home had enough staff overall, although some people said they sometimes waited a long time for help.
Inspectors found important weaknesses. Care plans and risk assessments were not always accurate or detailed enough. Some legal checks were missing when people’s freedom was restricted. Audits did not identify these problems, and lessons from incidents were not always used.
The overall rating and four of the five question ratings were Requires Improvement. Caring was rated Good. The provider must send CQC an action plan, and CQC said it would monitor progress with the local authority.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff treating people kindly and respectfully. People and relatives also gave positive feedback about the care.
“We saw many examples of staff approaching and responding to people in a kind and caring way.” from the report
Support for independence
Staff helped people make choices and remain independent, including by providing suitable equipment for eating.
“We observed staff ensuring people maintained their independence as much as possible.” from the report
Food and drink
People were offered a range of meals, drinks and snacks. Staff encouraged people patiently when they were reluctant to eat.
“People were offered a wide choice of meals, drinks and snacks throughout the day.” from the report
Staff training and support
The report says staff received induction, ongoing training and supervision to discuss their development needs.
“Staff received the training and support they required.” from the report
Safe recruitment
The staff files reviewed contained the required employment history and DBS checks.
“All staff files contained the necessary evidence including employment history and Disclosure and Barring Service checks.” from the report
Incomplete care records
seriousCare plans and risk assessments were not always accurate, up to date or detailed enough to guide safe care. This was linked to a breach of Regulation 17.
“The lack of complete information within care records put people at risk of receiving care and support which was not always safe.” from the report
Unlawful restrictions
seriousSome people had sensor equipment without the required capacity assessments. Inspectors found that people were deprived of their liberty without lawful authority.
“People were deprived of their liberty for the purpose of receiving care or treatment without lawful authority.” from the report
Weak quality checks
seriousAudits were carried out but did not identify or correct the inconsistencies found during inspection. Lessons from accidents and incidents were also not routinely used.
“The provider had failed to make sure that systems for auditing the safety and quality of the service were sufficiently robust to identify risks to people's safety and welfare.” from the report
Communication and activities
needs fixingInspectors were not assured that one person’s communication needs were being met and saw little interaction for that person. People on two floors mostly stayed in their rooms, although the home was recruiting more activities staff.
“However, during the inspection we observed one person cared for in bed had little interaction with staff, it appeared that this was due to unmet communication needs.” from the report
Waiting for staff
needs fixingThe home had enough staff to meet people’s needs overall, but some people reported waiting a long time for staff to come.
“However, people told us they sometimes had to wait a long time for staff to come.” from the report
PPE practice
needs fixingInspectors were only somewhat assured that personal protective equipment was being used safely because some staff were not wearing masks properly.
“We informed the provider that we observed not all staff were wearing masks appropriately.” from the report
- 01How have you corrected the incomplete or inconsistent care plans and risk assessments found at the inspection?
- 02Which residents use bed, chair or room sensors, and what capacity assessments and best-interest decisions are recorded for each person?
- 03How do you now check that lessons from accidents, incidents and safeguarding concerns lead to changes in care?
- 04What have you changed to meet the communication needs of the person identified as having little interaction, and how do you prevent social isolation?
- 05What action has been taken to reduce the waiting time people reported when they call for staff?
This was the home’s first planned inspection and covered all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 February 2023 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 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control during a coronavirus outbreak.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 13 November 2020. Inspectors looked specifically at infection prevention and control because the home had a coronavirus outbreak. The home provided accommodation and personal care for up to 40 people, with 26 people living there at the visit.
Inspectors were assured about all the infection control areas they checked. These included testing, personal protective equipment, visitor arrangements, social distancing, safe admissions, cleaning and managing outbreaks. Staff had contained the outbreak to one floor.
The home was clean and well presented. It had a dedicated hand hygiene room and a spare room with outside access and a perspex screen for indoor visits. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report is not a full judgement of the home's overall quality.
Routine testing
Routine testing helped the home identify the outbreak quickly.
“The service was accessing routine testing which had assisted them to identify an outbreak quickly.” from the report
Containing the outbreak
Staff contained the outbreak to one floor.
“Staff had successfully contained an outbreak to one floor.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the environment clean, hygienic and well presented.
“The environment was clean, hygienic and well presented.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
The home had created a hand hygiene room and a separate room designed to support indoor visits during winter.
“The provider had created a dedicated hand hygiene room and there was a spare room which had external access and a perspex screen installed” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently testing people living here and staff for infections?
- 02How would you contain an outbreak if one occurred now?
- 03What arrangements are currently in place for indoor visits?
- 04How do you make sure staff use personal protective equipment safely and effectively?
- 05How do you admit new residents safely during an infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, focused on Safe; the other four questions were not assessed and no rating was awarded. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 December 2020 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 Hutton Manor Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- February 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 January 2020.
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 Leeds
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 £1,250 a week. 89 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Took his time to learn about me read my care plan and to listen to me. great companionship with lots of laughing.”
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.