CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at The Hamptons Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found robust safeguarding procedures, safe medicines management and infection control arrangements. The report says the home was assured to be maintaining safe care in the areas checked.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- This question was not separately rated. Inspectors described a positive, caring culture and reported that people felt safe.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found clear leadership arrangements, regular audits and staff who understood their roles. The new manager was still in the process of registering with CQC.
What inspectors found, May 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were reassured that people were safe and received good standards of care.
This was an unannounced targeted inspection on 17 March 2021. It followed concerns about personal care, medicines and changes in leadership. The inspection looked at specific parts of Safe and Well-led, not the whole service.
Inspectors found robust safeguarding procedures, safe medicines management and effective infection control arrangements. They also found a positive and caring culture, with staff clear about their responsibilities.
The home was inspected but not rated. Its previous overall rating was Good, published in October 2018. This inspection did not change that rating because targeted inspections do not assess every area.
Safeguarding
Inspectors found strong procedures to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm. Staff said they had suitable training and guidance.
“Procedures to protect people from harm or abuse were robust.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines were managed safely. The electronic system had checks built into it, and staff had training and regular competency checks.
“Staff managed people's medicines safely and had in-depth training to assess their skills.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, including personal protective equipment, testing, distancing and managing outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Leadership and culture
The new manager had maintained a caring culture during the pandemic. Staff felt valued, supported and clear about their responsibilities.
“The new manager had retained and advanced the positive, caring working culture at The Hamptons during the pandemic.” from the report
Manager registration
needs fixingThe service did not have a manager registered with CQC at the time of inspection. The report says the new manager was in the process of registering.
“The service did not have a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission.” from the report
- 01Has the manager now completed registration with the CQC, and if not, what is the current position?
- 02How are medicines checked on every shift, and how are staff competency checks kept up to date?
- 03What audits are carried out for safeguarding, infection control and medicines, and what happens when an issue is found?
- 04When is the next comprehensive inspection expected, and which areas will it cover?
- 05How does the home maintain family contact and support people's wellbeing during infection outbreaks or restrictions?
This was a targeted inspection of specific parts of Safe and Well-led, including infection control, medicines, care delivery and leadership; it did not assess the whole service, and the previous ratings carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 May 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, October 2018
Rated Good, with Outstanding caring, but inspectors found weaknesses in medicines records and oversight.
This was the home’s first inspection. It was unannounced and took place on 22 and 24 August 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and visiting professionals. They also observed care, checked the building, and reviewed care, medicines, staff and management records.
Inspectors found kind, personalised care and very good staffing levels. People were supported to make choices, take part in activities and maintain their independence. The home had a clean, modern environment, good food and strong links with health and social care professionals.
The main weakness was medicines oversight. The electronic system contained stock-checking errors, and records for creams and ointments were not always clear. Inspectors made a recommendation for improvement, but did not record any breached regulations.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, effective, responsive and well-led were rated Good, while caring was rated Outstanding.
Kind, individual care
Staff knew people well and used their life stories, preferences and abilities to shape support. Inspectors saw compassionate interactions that helped people feel relaxed and more independent.
“The team approach achieved enhanced quality of life for people and helped them to flourish through an excellent, person-centred culture.” from the report
Strong staffing
Inspectors found very good staffing levels, including dedicated activity staff. This allowed time for conversations, activities and one-to-one support.
“Excellent staffing levels meant engagement, fun activities, and one-to-one support was constantly available to optimise people's welfare.” from the report
Good environment and activities
The home was newly built, clean and well maintained. It offered several lounges, gardens, sensory areas and activities for people with different interests and needs.
“Facilities included six lounges, two dining areas, two external balconies and two large gardens.” from the report
Good involvement and leadership
People and relatives were involved in care planning and reviews. Staff said managers were supportive, and audits were used to follow up problems.
“Quality assurance audits we saw showed where issues were identified, follow-up action had been taken to address them.” from the report
Medicines oversight
needs fixingThe electronic medicines system had errors in stock checks and did not always give robust oversight. Inspectors said the system needed time to become fully embedded.
“The two systems were confusing, which meant they were not always robust enough to retain good oversight.” from the report
Creams and ointments records
needs fixingInstructions and body maps for topical medicines were not always well defined. The manager addressed this during the inspection, but inspectors still made a recommendation for further improvement.
“Recordkeeping in relation to the administration of creams and ointments were not always clear.” from the report
Some risk assessments were generic
minorCare records included risk assessments, but inspectors found they were not always personalised. The manager said procedures would continue to be improved.
“We noted the documents were not always personalised and were more generic in format.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to the electronic medicines system since the inspection, and how are stock checks now verified?
- 02How are creams and ointments recorded, including body maps, instructions and checks that they have been given correctly?
- 03How have risk assessments been made more personalised for each person?
- 04How will you make sure staffing levels remain sufficient if more people move into the home?
- 05How are people and relatives involved in monthly care plan reviews and decisions about activities and treatment?
This was the home’s first comprehensive inspection and covered all five questions: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 October 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 The Hamptons Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- May 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
- October 2018GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 August 2017.
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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.