CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Hawthornes
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed, including PPE, testing, cleaning, visiting and admissions. Staff and the registered manager were unsure about the suitable temperature range for arrival checks, but this was followed up immediately.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Requires improvement
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Targeted inspection found good infection control practice, but the service was not rated.
Inspectors visited on 13 January 2022. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the COVID-19 pandemic. They looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether staffing pressures affected care.
The inspectors were assured that the home used PPE safely, provided testing, managed visitors and admissions safely, and had suitable cleaning and infection control arrangements. Staff and people had COVID-19 risk assessments, and staff had received at least two vaccinations.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or a full rating for all five areas of care.
Visitor safety
Visitors had to show a negative COVID-19 lateral flow test before entering. The home kept visitors informed about visiting guidance.
“Before visitors were allowed into the home, they had to provide evidence of a negative COVID-19 lateral flow test.” from the report
PPE and supplies
Staff were observed using PPE correctly. The home had enough PPE and hand washing products.
“There were sufficient amounts of PPE and hand washing products in the home.” from the report
Cleaning and audits
Cleaning schedules were completed and infection control audits were carried out. The infection control policy referred to current guidance.
“Regular infection control audits were being carried out.” from the report
COVID-19 testing and vaccination
People and staff were part of a regular testing programme. Staff had received at least two COVID-19 vaccinations.
“People and staff were part of a regular programme of testing for COVID-19.” from the report
Temperature-check guidance
minorStaff and the registered manager were unsure what temperature range was suitable when checking people on arrival. The manager followed this up immediately and shared the information with staff.
“Temperatures were checked on arrival, although staff and the registered manager were unsure what a suitable body temperature range was.” from the report
- 01What infection control and visiting arrangements are in place now?
- 02How do you make sure staff know the correct temperature range for arrival checks?
- 03How are COVID-19 testing arrangements managed for people living here, staff and visitors?
- 04What staffing pressures were present at the inspection, and did they affect people's care?
- 05How often are infection control audits completed, and what happens when they identify a problem?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and the effect of COVID-19 staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 February 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.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found good safety and leadership, but the overall rating still reflected older ratings that were not reassessed.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 26 February 2021. Two inspectors reviewed information, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found people felt safe, medicines were generally managed properly, risks were understood, infection controls were in place and management systems were effective.
The overall rating remained Requires Improvement because this visit only checked Safe and Well-led. Ratings for the other key questions were carried over from earlier comprehensive inspections. Safe and Well-led had both improved from Requires Improvement to Good since the last inspection.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe, and staff understood individual risks and the steps needed to manage them.
“People felt safe living at the service.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements for preventing and managing infection, including safe use of protective equipment and testing.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Good oversight
The home used audits and action plans to identify improvements and monitor whether they were completed.
“Action plans were completed following audits, the registered manager maintained good oversight of progress and outcomes.” from the report
Person-centred support
Inspectors found that staff knew people well, treated them respectfully and supported their choices and independence.
“Staff were person-centred, caring and respectful in their approach.” from the report
Employment records
minorInspectors found that dates in staff employment histories needed to be recorded accurately. The manager agreed to address this.
“We spoke with the registered manager about ensuring staff employment history dates were accurately recorded, they agreed to address this.” from the report
Medicine instructions
minorOne medicine prescription did not give sufficiently precise instructions for an as-needed medicine. Action was taken during the inspection.
“one prescription being specific, for example, stating the exact number of paracetamol to be given rather than 'one or two'.” from the report
Confidentiality of staff concerns
needs fixingSome staff did not feel sure that concerns they raised would remain confidential. The manager was advised and gave assurances.
“Other staff stated that whilst they felt able to raise concerns, they did not feel these would remain confidential.” from the report
- 01Which older ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive still apply, and what improvements have been made in those areas?
- 02How do you check that staff employment history dates and other recruitment records are accurate?
- 03How do you make sure as-needed medicine instructions state the exact dose to be given?
- 04How can staff raise concerns confidentially, and how is confidentiality protected?
- 05What changes have been made as a result of feedback from people and relatives?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led, including infection control; the other key question ratings were carried over from previous comprehensive inspections. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 April 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.
Every inspection of The Hawthornes
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2021Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- August 2019Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 June 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 Kirklees
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. 86 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.”
“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.