• Care Home
  • Care home

Hurstway Care Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

142 The Hurstway, Erdington, Birmingham, West Midlands, B23 5XN (0121) 350 0191

Provided and run by:
Hurstway Limited

Assessment report published 21 July 2025

On this page

Safe

Good

21 July 2025

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

At our last inspection we rated this key question requires improvement. At this inspection the rating has changed to good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 72 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Learning culture

Score: 3

The service had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. They listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. The manager investigated incidents, accidents and near miss occurrences to see if anything could be done differently. For example, following someone falling the management team reviewed the incident and referred the person onto additional services to keep them as safe as possible.

Safe systems, pathways and transitions

Score: 3

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. When people’s individual needs changed, they were referred onto other healthcare providers without delay. People had care plans based on effective assessments which were individual to them. These were reviewed promptly if changes were noted. If someone moved between services, for example to hospital, the provider had systems in place to ensure the most recent and relevant information was quickly and effectively passed to ensure the person received continuous care. One person told us the staff identified they were unwell and supported them for assessment at hospital for which they were grateful.

Safeguarding

Score: 3

The service worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. They concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. When it was necessary the service shared concerns quickly and appropriately. Everyone we spoke with stated they knew how to raise a concern if they were worried about anything and were confident, they would be responded to appropriately. Staff had received training on safeguarding and knew how to raise concerns. One staff member described what they would do if they suspected people were at risk. They went on to say they felt empowered to raise any concerns and felt they would be supported to do so.

Involving people to manage risks

Score: 3

The service worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. They provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. People had individual assessments of risks associated with their care and support. These included, but were not limited to, risk of falls, diet and nutrition. Staff were aware of these assessments and knew how to keep people safe. One person told us they felt scared when they first came to live at Hurstway Care Home as it was their first experience of care. However, they felt safe, and staff supported them in a way they liked which gave them reassurance.

Safe environments

Score: 2

The service detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, and facilities were generally maintained for the delivery of safe care. However, we identified some minor changes which were needed to ensure people remained safe. This included the covering of 1 hot water pipe, the removal of some sharp screws, a replacement window restrictor fitting and the removal of a piece of broken furniture which hampered rapid access to firefighting equipment. The provider acted immediately and effectively to ensure people were safe. Some people had privacy gates fitted to their rooms. Changes were needed to the risk assessment to ensure these were safe not only for the person whose room it was but also for those potentially entering the room. Again, the provider acted promptly to correct this. Regular checks of the premises were completed including the emergency fire alarm systems to ensure it was operational.

Safe and effective staffing

Score: 3

The service made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. People gave us mixed views regarding staffing numbers. Some felt there were not enough staff at times but generally staff were available to help and support them promptly when needed. We saw staff were readily available to support people when required. The provider followed safe recruitment checks to ensure only suitable persons were employed to support people.

Infection prevention and control

Score: 3

The service assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading. Some areas of the home were in need of decoration and the provider had an improvement plan in place to address this. People told us the staff supporting them always wore appropriate personal protection equipment. One person said, “It’s very important that it’s hygienic.” They described how cleanliness mattered to them and how the staff effectively cleaned the home.

Medicines optimisation

Score: 3

The service made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. They involved people in planning, including when changes happened. People told us they received their medicines as prescribed. One person said, “I am on 4 tablets a day and they are always on time.” People had protocols in place for the safe administration of PRN (as and when needed) medicines including the prescribed dose, time between administrations and maximum dose within a 24-hour period. Staff felt comfortable and empowered to raise any issues regarding medicines in an open and transparent way. Issues were quickly addressed by the management team to ensure people received their medicines safely.