Skip to content
CQC ExplainedEvery inspection report, in plain English

CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by GB Healthcare Group

Cottingham Hall

195-197, Cottingham Road, Hull, HU5 2EG

Goodpublished 4 January 2024, 2 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the service performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
Inspectors found safe recruitment, enough staff, appropriate risk management and safe medicines administration. Infection prevention arrangements were also assessed positively.
Effective?
Good
Staff had induction, training, supervision and competency checks. People's dietary, healthcare and decision-making needs were supported, although some records needed more detail and parts of the building needed improvement.
Caring?
Good
Staff were kind, patient and respectful. They knew people well, supported independence and involved people in decisions about their care.
Responsive?
Good
Care plans were personalised and regularly reviewed. The home offered activities, supported communication needs and responded to complaints and concerns.
Well-led?
Good
The registered manager promoted a positive culture and staff felt supported. However, action on some identified improvements had not always been prompt, so inspectors made a recommendation.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, January 2024

Cottingham Hall is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but some improvements were not dealt with quickly.

Inspectors visited unannounced on 16 and 24 November 2023. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff. They reviewed care files, medicine records and checks on the home's management.

All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine practices, suitable training and care that respected people's choices, privacy and dignity.

The home provided personalised care, activities and support to access health services. People and relatives were positive about the staff and felt able to raise concerns.

The main weakness was that the provider did not always act quickly on problems identified by the home. Some refurbishment and record-keeping improvements were still needed. Inspectors recommended a review of the systems for responding to shortfalls.

What inspectors praised

  • Safe staffing and medicines

    Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and safe systems for receiving, storing and giving medicines.

    “There were enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report

  • Kind and respectful care

    People were supported by staff who knew them well and treated them with kindness, dignity and respect.

    “People were cared for and supported by staff that were kind, patient and respectful.” from the report

  • Personalised support

    Care plans reflected people's preferences, needs and choices. Staff supported people to make decisions about their routines and care.

    “Care plans were person-centred and were reviewed on a regular basis.” from the report

  • Activities and involvement

    The home offered a range of activities and involved people and relatives in the running of the service.

    “The activities coordinator tailored activities to meet people's needs and developed a sense of belonging within the community” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

  • Slow action on improvements

    needs fixing

    The provider had not acted promptly on some improvements identified by the registered manager. Inspectors asked for systems and processes to be reviewed.

    “The registered manager identified areas for improvement, but prompt action had not always been taken by the provider.” from the report

  • Refurbishment and records

    minor

    Some areas needed redecoration or refurbishment, and inspectors found some record-keeping shortfalls. The provider addressed some areas during the inspection and put action plans in place.

    “Some areas of the service required re-decoration and refurbishment.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01Have all the redecoration and refurbishment work identified before the inspection now been completed?
  2. 02What changes have been made to make sure action is taken promptly when audits identify a problem?
  3. 03What record-keeping improvements were identified, and how are you checking that records now contain enough detail?
  4. 04How do you check that there are enough staff on each shift to meet people's needs?
  5. 05How will you involve my relative and our family in care reviews and decisions about activities and daily routines?

This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC areas, including care, the premises and infection prevention arrangements. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 January 2024 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Cottingham Hall

3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. January 2024Goodcurrent ratingstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Cottingham Hall →

  2. November 2018Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
  3. April 2016Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
  4. July 2022

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 18 July 2022.

Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.

Another option

Or stay at home with a private carer

Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.

About live-in careHow PrimeCarers works
Same provider

Other services run by GB Healthcare Group Ltd

2 other services on the CQC register. A pattern across a group tells you more than one report.

Blossom Lodge

Barnsley, S71
Inadequate
NursingDementia
Rated 2 months agocare home
Nearby

Other care homes near Hull

All in Kingston upon Hull, City of

Dales House

Hull, HU6 · 0.4 km
Good
ResidentialDementia
Rated 6 years agocare home

Ebor Lodge

Hull, HU5 · 1.4 km
Good
Residential
Rated 6 years agocare home