CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Hadlows
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable risk plans, safe recruitment checks, regular safety checks and medicines systems that staff followed.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's physical, social and emotional needs were assessed and supported. Staff had specialist acquired brain injury training, and people were supported with food, health appointments and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- People said staff were kind, respectful and knew them well. People were involved in care decisions, house meetings and everyday activities that promoted independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans included people's preferences, routines, histories and needs. The home supported interests, employment, relationships, communication, complaints and end of life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found strong leadership, an open culture and regular checks to monitor quality. People, staff, relatives and professionals were involved in giving feedback and improving the service.
What inspectors found, October 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care for people with acquired brain injuries.
This was an unannounced planned inspection. One inspector spoke with five people, three staff members and other professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files, training records, complaints and management checks.
The home supported seven people with acquired brain injuries and could support up to nine. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practices, suitable training and good links with health professionals. People were supported to make choices, build skills, work, enjoy activities and become more independent.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means inspectors found consistently good outcomes and care, but it does not mean every part of the service was judged perfect. The previous inspection was also rated Good.
Promoting independence
People were supported to cook, gain employment, visit places of interest and work towards more independent living.
“People were encouraged to be independent and were involved in planning and cooking meals.” from the report
Kind relationships
People said staff were kind and respectful, and inspectors found trusting relationships between people and staff.
“People continued to be treated with care and kindness.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described people's preferences, routines, history and needs. Staff adapted support when people's needs changed.
“Care plans contained detailed information about people's likes, dislikes, routines, personal history, cultural and religious needs.” from the report
Good health support
Staff supported people to attend appointments, follow professional advice and maintain their health. Medicines continued to be given as prescribed.
“People's health needs were met through developing partnership working with a range of health care professionals.” from the report
Open management
The home had an open culture, regular audits and meetings where people and staff could influence how it was run.
“There continued to be strong, visible leadership within the service that inspired staff to provide quality care.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and support my relative's particular acquired brain injury needs before they move in?
- 02What specialist acquired brain injury training do staff receive, and how is their competence checked?
- 03How would you support my relative to build independence, take part in activities or work towards personal goals?
- 04What communication aids or approaches would be available if my relative has memory or communication problems?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in health appointments, care reviews and end of life wishes?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the care home premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 October 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, January 2017
The Hadlows was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with only minor issues around staff meetings and training delays.
Inspectors visited the home on 12 December 2016. The visit was announced. They spoke with people living there, relatives, staff, the manager and health and social care professionals. They also checked care files, staff records, medicines, complaints, accidents and quality checks.
The home supported nine people on the inspection day and could accommodate up to 10. Inspectors found that people were safe, involved in their care, supported to make choices and encouraged to be independent. Medicines, staffing, recruitment, food, health support and safeguarding arrangements were all judged good.
People appeared happy and comfortable. Staff knew people well and supported activities inside and outside the home. The home had recently been refurbished, and inspectors found clear records, good communication and effective systems for checking and improving care.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. This means inspectors found the service met the relevant requirements at the time of this inspection.
Promoting independence
People were supported to make choices, build skills and take part in everyday tasks. Some people could go out alone, and others were supported to move towards more independent living.
“People were encouraged and supported to be as independent as possible.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's communication needs, preferences, routines and important relationships. People and relatives were involved in planning and reviewing care.
“People were fully involved in making decisions about their care and staff took account of their individual needs and preferences.” from the report
Safe care
Inspectors found good arrangements for safeguarding, risk assessments, staffing, recruitment and medicines. Accidents and incidents were recorded and reviewed for learning.
“Medicines were managed safely. The processes in place ensured that the administration and handling of medicines was suitable for the people who lived in the home.” from the report
Activities and choice
People chose meals and activities and were supported to go out, attend appointments and maintain relationships and interests.
“People were encouraged to take part in outside activities as much as possible and supported to maintain these links.” from the report
Quality oversight
The provider and manager used regular audits, surveys and action plans to monitor the service and follow up improvements.
“There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.” from the report
Staff meetings
minorNo staff meeting had been held since August 2016 because of the refurbishment. A meeting was booked for January 2017, and a team briefing had been used in the meantime.
“The registered manager told us that due to the upheaval of the refurbishment programme, he had not held a staff meeting since August 2016” from the report
Specialist training delay
minorOne specialist training course was not available for two months. The manager provided fact sheets and books while staff waited for the training.
“Although the registered manager had arranged this, it was not available for two months” from the report
- 01How many people currently share the two bathrooms, and how do you protect privacy and dignity?
- 02How do you assess and review the risks when someone manages their own medicines?
- 03Are staff meetings now held regularly, and how are staff views and concerns recorded?
- 04Have all staff completed the specialist training identified in the report?
- 05How are people currently supported to choose activities, go out and build independence?
This was a planned, announced inspection covering all five key questions: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 January 2017 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 The Hadlows
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 9 May 2014.
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.