CQC report explained · a nursing home, run by Park Homes ()
Hazel Bank Care Home
Daisy Hill Lane, Daisy Hill, Bradford, BD9 6BN
Rated Good: inspectors found the service performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, January 2024
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, effective care and clear progress, but recruitment checks, medicines records and quality monitoring still need strengthening.
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection on 4 and 5 January 2024. Inspectors, a medicines inspector and an Expert by Experience looked around the home, observed care, spoke with people, relatives, staff and professionals, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home had improved since its last inspection, which was rated Inadequate. Inspectors found enough experienced staff, kind relationships, improved care plans, good support with food and health needs, and better monitoring of quality and safety.
Some important improvements were still needed. Recruitment checks were not always complete, records for some topical medicines were inconsistent, and some capacity assessments and best-interest decisions were not robust. The overall rating is now Requires Improvement. The home is no longer in Special Measures and was not in breach of regulations at this inspection.
Kind relationships
People appeared relaxed with staff. Inspectors saw warm, trusting relationships and said staff respected privacy, dignity and independence.
“People were well supported. Their privacy, dignity, and independence were respected and promoted.” from the report
Enough experienced staff
The home had enough staff to keep people safe. People were supported by a consistent and experienced team.
“The provider ensured there were enough staff to support people safely. People were supported by a consistent and experienced team.” from the report
Good support with needs
People were supported with nutrition, health care and activities. The home worked closely with health and social care professionals.
“There were close links with other health and social care professionals which included a weekly ward round by the GP.” from the report
Clear improvement
The provider had acted on the previous inspection findings. Inspectors found improvements in staffing deployment, nutrition and hydration monitoring, care planning and quality checks.
“The provider had taken positive action to address the issues from the last inspection.” from the report
Recruitment checks
needs fixingThe provider had not always followed its recruitment policy. Some records were incomplete and one staff member had not had all checks completed.
“They had not always followed their own recruitment policy and we found examples where records were incomplete and one instance where full checks had not been carried out for a staff member.” from the report
Topical medicine records
minorMedicines were generally managed safely, but records for some non-medicated creams and other topical preparations were inconsistent. The provider was asked to review its monitoring.
“However, there were some recording inconsistencies for non-medicated topical preparations.” from the report
Mental Capacity Act decisions
needs fixingSome people used bed or chair sensors without the required capacity assessments and best-interest decisions. The provider was asked to improve staff guidance and training.
“We saw examples where people were using bed and chair sensors without the appropriate capacity assessments and best interest decisions being in place.” from the report
Quality checks
needs fixingAudit systems had improved but were not fully established. They had not identified some problems in care records and staff recruitment.
“We found some areas where the systems required improvement to ensure they were fully embedded and identified all areas robustly.” from the report
- 01How have you checked that all current staff recruitment files now contain the required checks?
- 02How do you record and monitor the application of topical medicines and creams?
- 03How do you make sure bed and chair sensors are covered by proper capacity assessments and best-interest decisions?
- 04How are your audits now identifying gaps or contradictions in care records?
- 05What further improvements remain on the service improvement plan, and when will they be checked?
This was a follow-up inspection of action from the previous inspection; the report says ratings for key questions not inspected carried over from the last inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 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.
Every inspection of Hazel Bank Care Home
6 rated inspections over 9 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- January 2024Requires improvementcurrent ratingup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2023Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- February 2023Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2021Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 January 2011.
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.
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.
Other services run by Park Homes (UK) Limited
11 other services on the CQC register. A pattern across a group tells you more than one report.