CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Runwood
Highview Lodge
Cherry Orchard, Gadebridge, Hemel Hempstead, HP1 3SD
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the service was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, January 2024
Rated Requires Improvement overall, with Inadequate leadership and serious concerns about safety, staffing and personalised care.
Inspectors visited the home without notice on 17 and 20 October 2023. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and professionals, observed care, and checked care, medicine and management records.
They found that improvements promised after the previous inspection had not happened. Medicines were not always managed safely. There were not always enough staff, and some care was missed or delayed. Care plans sometimes gave conflicting information.
People and relatives said staff were kind, and inspectors saw kind and respectful care. However, care was often task-led rather than based on each person's choices. Some people had little social contact or activity.
The overall rating remained Requires Improvement. Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive were all Requires Improvement. Well-led fell to Inadequate because leadership was unstable and checks had not found or fixed important problems.
Kind staff
People and relatives generally described staff as kind and caring. Inspectors also saw staff speaking to people in a kind, attentive and respectful way.
“Staff were kind, attentive and respectful when speaking with people.” from the report
Safeguarding awareness
Safeguarding concerns were reported appropriately. Staff had training and knew what to do if they were worried about abuse.
“Staff had received training and knew what to do if they had concerns about abuse.” from the report
Infection controls
Inspectors were assured about the home's infection prevention arrangements, including the use of protective equipment and managing outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Health support
People were supported to attend health and social care appointments. The home worked with health and social care professionals.
“People were supported to have health and social care appointments.” from the report
Unsafe medicines management
seriousSome medicines were missed or not recorded properly. One person was left with covert medicines without supervision, and there was no risk assessment for this.
“People did not always receive their medicines in accordance with the prescriber's instructions.” from the report
Not enough staff
seriousPeople sometimes waited for help, and care was missed or delayed. Inspectors had to intervene five times to help keep people safe and meet their needs.
“We observed people waiting for support and on 5 occasions had to intervene to ensure people were safe and had their needs met.” from the report
Risks not acted on
seriousThe home had identified a higher number of falls in the evening and at night but had not taken action. Pressure care records and equipment were also not always adequate.
“No action had been taken in response to this analysis.” from the report
Care not personalised
needs fixingCare was often delivered to a shared timetable rather than at times chosen by each person. Preferences about staff gender and daily routines were not always respected.
“Care was not given at individualised times.” from the report
Limited social contact
needs fixingSome people who stayed in their rooms or beds had no social interaction apart from care tasks. Activities did not reach everyone.
“On our visits, people who stayed in bed, or in their rooms, did not have any social interaction, other than staff providing care tasks.” from the report
Unstable leadership
seriousThe registered manager had left and there had been three further managers, including one who had been in post for only three weeks. Management checks did not find important problems.
“This meant there was no stable leadership in the home and left people at risk of receiving a poor standard of care.” from the report
- 01What immediate changes have been made to prevent missed medicines and improve medicine records?
- 02How many staff are now deployed on each shift, especially in the evening and at night?
- 03What action has been taken to respond to the higher number of falls during the evening and night?
- 04How will you make sure care plans agree with each other and reflect each person's routines, preferences and risks?
- 05How will people who stay in their rooms or beds receive regular social contact and activities?
This inspection considered all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control, after concerns were received about management, care and staffing. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 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 Highview Lodge
6 rated inspections over 9 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- January 2024Requires improvementcurrent ratingstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- October 2022Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2021Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 December 2010.
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 Runwood Homes Limited
56 other services on the CQC register. A pattern across a group tells you more than one report.