Skip to content
CQC ExplainedEvery inspection report, in plain English

CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Horizon Healthcare Homes

Hampton House

69 Keldregate, Bradley, Huddersfield, HD2 1BQ

Goodpublished 15 February 2024, 2 years ago

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

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
People felt safe, risks were assessed and staffing levels were sufficient. Medicines were administered safely, records were complete and the home was clean and free from odours.
Effective?
Good
People's needs and choices were assessed and met. Staff had suitable training and support, and people were helped with food, healthcare and communication. Inspectors found some capacity reviews were not regular and not all DoLS conditions were being met at the time, but action was taken.
Caring?
Good
The report does not give a separate Caring rating. It says staff were kind and considerate, and that people were treated with dignity and respect.
Responsive?
Good
Care plans were personalised and supported people's independence, communication, relationships and activities. Inspectors found some inconsistency in activity plans, which the manager updated during the inspection.
Well-led?
Good
The home had strong quality checks, open management and regular involvement of people, relatives and staff. Accidents, complaints and other information were used to make improvements.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, February 2024

Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but some legal reviews and activity records needed improvement.

Inspectors visited the home on three dates between 14 December 2023 and 4 January 2024. The first visit was unannounced, and one visit took place outside normal working hours. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care, medicines, staff and management records.

They found people felt safe and settled. Risks, staffing, recruitment, medicines, food, cleanliness and infection control were well managed. Staff were kind and understood people's needs. People were involved in their care, supported to make choices and helped to keep relationships and interests.

The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led were each rated Good. The report does not give a separate Caring rating. The previous overall rating was also Good, published in September 2017.

What inspectors praised

  • Safe medicines

    Medicines were given safely and records were fully completed. Staff had suitable training and checks for giving medicines.

    “Medicines were administered safely and in line with prescribing guidelines.” from the report

  • Kind, respectful care

    People told inspectors they felt safe and settled. Staff were attentive, understanding and supported people with dignity and respect.

    “Staff were kind, considerate and very understanding towards people.” from the report

  • Choice and independence

    People helped shape their care and were supported to have choice and control. The home supported people to be as independent as possible.

    “People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives” from the report

  • Strong management checks

    The provider regularly reviewed care, accidents, complaints and staff skills. The report says concerns were acted on quickly.

    “Robust quality assurance processes ensured all aspects of care delivery were reviewed regularly.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

  • Legal reviews were not always up to date

    needs fixing

    Capacity and best-interest decisions were in place, but inspectors found they were not reviewed regularly. The manager completed reviews after this was raised.

    “MCA and best interest decisions were in place for people, however we noted these were not reviewed regularly.” from the report

  • DoLS conditions

    needs fixing

    Inspectors found that not all DoLS conditions were being met during the inspection. The manager took prompt action and introduced a plan to address this.

    “During our inspection we found not all DOLs conditions was being met.” from the report

  • Activity records

    needs fixing

    People took part in meaningful activities, but activity plans were not consistent. The manager updated the plans and put a process in place to check they were followed.

    “There was inconsistency with people's activity plans. Following feedback, the registered manager updated all activity plans” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What plan was put in place to make sure every DoLS condition is now being met?
  2. 02How often are capacity and best-interest decisions reviewed, and how is this checked?
  3. 03How do you make sure each person's activity plan is followed consistently?
  4. 04How are people who do not communicate verbally involved in choices such as menus and activities?
  5. 05What further improvements are planned for the electronic care and medicines records?

The inspection covered Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led; the report does not give a separate Caring rating, and ratings for key questions not inspected carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 February 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 Hampton House

3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.

  1. February 2024Goodcurrent rating
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Hampton House →

  2. March 2021Inspected but not rated
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk

  3. September 2017Goodup from Requires improvement
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. August 2016Requires improvement
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. May 2015

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 May 2015.

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 Horizon Healthcare Homes Limited

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

Roxburgh Lodge

Bradford, BD15
Good
ResidentialDementia
Rated 3 years agoReport explained

Beckside Lodge

Bradford, BD6
Outstanding
Residential
Rated 7 years agocare home

Cranmer Court

Leeds, LS17
Good
Residential
Rated 7 years agocare home

Ferndale Lodge

Huddersfield, HD5
Good
Residential
Rated 8 years agocare home

Fixby Lodge

Huddersfield, HD2
Good
Residential
Rated 8 years agocare home

Langley Lodge

Huddersfield, HD2
Good
Residential
Rated 6 years agocare home
Nearby

Other care homes near Huddersfield

All in Kirklees

Langley Lodge

Huddersfield, HD2 · 1.1 km
Good
Residential
Rated 6 years agocare home

Fixby Lodge

Huddersfield, HD2 · 1.6 km
Good
Residential
Rated 8 years agocare home

Oxley Woodhouse

Huddersfield, HD2 · 2.0 km
Good
Residential
Rated 8 years agocare home

The Radcliffe

Mirfield, WF14 · 2.0 km
Requires improvement
ResidentialDementia
Rated 19 months agocare home