CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Old Hall Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control was being managed safely. They found appropriate PPE, testing, cleaning, visiting and outbreak arrangements.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection prevention and control during a targeted COVID-19 review.
Inspectors visited the home on 24 November 2020. The visit was announced and focused only on infection prevention and control because of a coronavirus outbreak.
They found enough protective equipment, including masks, gloves, aprons and hand sanitiser. Staff were observed using it in line with national guidance. The home was clean, had regular extra cleaning and had arrangements for staff to change clothes and wash their hands before entering.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, testing, admissions, social distancing, shielding and infection outbreaks safely. People could keep in touch with relatives through a visiting room, and arrangements supported visits for people receiving end of life care.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall rating or full ratings for the five care questions.
Protective equipment
There was enough PPE, it was available throughout the home and staff were seen using it appropriately.
“The provider ensured there was sufficient stock of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) in place including masks, gloves, aprons and hand sanitiser.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was clean and used regular cleaning of frequently touched areas, with extra cleaning in the evening and at night.
“The service was clean with no offensive odours.” from the report
Outbreak management
Inspectors found that a recent COVID-19 outbreak had been managed well, with plans used safely and extra testing in place.
“A recent outbreak of COVID 19 at the service had been managed well and the plans in place to support people had been utilised safely.” from the report
Keeping families in touch
The home had created a visiting room and had arrangements for relatives to visit people receiving end of life care.
“The provider had set up a visiting room to facilitate visits between people and their relatives.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are PPE supplies, staff training and infection control checks managed now?
- 02How does the home currently arrange visits with relatives, including visits for people receiving end of life care?
- 03What testing arrangements are in place for residents and staff now?
- 04How would the home respond if there was another infection outbreak?
- 05What was found at the most recent full inspection, since this visit only looked at infection prevention and control?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during a coronavirus outbreak; it did not rate the wider service or the other care questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 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.
What inspectors found, June 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care and major improvements, but staff recruitment checks still required improvement.
Inspectors visited on 7 and 13 May 2019. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They looked at care records, medicines, staffing, recruitment, complaints and the home's management systems.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. Safe was rated Requires Improvement because some staff recruitment checks were not completed reliably before staff started work.
The report describes significant improvement since the previous inspection. Earlier breaches had been addressed, care planning and risk management had improved, and there were enough staff to meet people's needs without rushing.
The home had previously been rated Inadequate and placed in Special Measures. It was no longer in Special Measures after this inspection. CQC said it would continue monitoring information about the home and could inspect sooner if concerns were received.
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff supported personal choices and encouraged people to remain as independent as possible.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors saw that staff had time to meet people's needs without rushing. Staffing levels were kept under review.
“There were sufficient staff to meet people's care and support needs without rushing.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded individual preferences, communication needs and life histories. Staff used this information to provide meaningful support and activities.
“The activities coordinator had developed a programme of weekly activities to provide people with physical and mental stimulation.” from the report
Better staff preparation
Staff had access to training, supervision and structured induction. New staff shadowed experienced colleagues before working independently.
“New members of staff participated in a structured induction programme which included initial training followed by a period of shadowing experienced colleagues.” from the report
Recruitment checks
seriousSome references were requested only when staff started work, or were not dated. Inspectors found no evidence that an unsuitable person had been employed, but said the process needed to be safer and more consistent.
“the provider's approach to conducting pre-employment checks was not consistently safe, increasing the chance of someone unsuitable being employed.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure references and all other pre-employment checks are completed and dated before a new staff member starts?
- 02How do you check that the improvements introduced by the new registered manager have continued?
- 03How are staffing levels decided for different times of day, including when people are going to bed?
- 04How are care plans reviewed when a person's needs, preferences or risks change?
- 05How can people and relatives raise concerns, and how will the home show what action was taken?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, following the previous Inadequate rating and time in Special Measures. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 June 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.
Every inspection of The Old Hall Residential Care Home
5 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at The Old Hall Residential Care Home →
- June 2019Goodup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at The Old Hall Residential Care Home →
- November 2018Inadequatestayed InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- July 2018Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- April 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- November 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 December 2010.
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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Lincolnshire
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.
8 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.