Skip to main content
Unclaimed listing CQC record · synced 28 October 2026

Higher Bank

off Adelaide Terrace, Blackburn, Lancashire, BB2 6EU · View on map

Residential CareCaring for adults over 65 yrs
Regulated by CQC · England Full report ↗
Inadequate Overall rating
InadequateRequires improv.GoodOutstanding

The CQC says: “The service is performing badly and we've taken action against the person or organisation that runs it.” Read the CQC report

Safe InadequateEffective Requires improvementCaring Requires improvementResponsive GoodWell-led Inadequate

Report published 15 October 2026

Beds
22
CQC rating
Inadequate
Registered
2010
No photos yet · operators add a full gallery & video with Advanced

Overview

Higher Bank is a residential care home in Blackburn, Lancashire (BB2). The home is registered for up to 22 residents and is run by Mr K and Mrs K Hunter and Mrs I Coughlin.

The home provides residential care. CQC records list its specialism as Caring for adults over 65 yrs. CQC rated it Inadequate at its last assessment.

Key facts

The inspection record

Care Quality CommissionEngland's independent regulator of health and social care

Overall

Inadequate

Report published 15 October 2026

SafeInadequate
EffectiveRequires improvement
CaringRequires improvement
ResponsiveGood
Well-ledInadequate

“Date of onsite assessment: 27 and 30 July 2026. The service is a residential care service providing support for up to 22 older people. At this inspection 10 people lived at the service.”

“ ”

Show the full assessment summaryHide the rest of the summary

“At the last rated inspection in 2018 the home was rated good. At this inspection we found standards had declined and the home was now in breach of legal regulations for safe care and treatment, safeguarding, staffing and governance.”

“ ”

“The service needed to improve their learning culture. Work was needed to ensure peoples risks were always being appropriately managed. The facilities and equipment were not always well maintained which in turn did not always mitigate risk. It was difficult to determine if enough staff were in place due to the registered managers being included within staffing numbers and no dependency tool being in place. Staff training was not up to date. Medicines were not managed safely; audits of medicines were not robust and records relating to medicines were not always as concise as they should be. Though people could raise concerns, further work was required to ensure people were protected and kept safe. A registered manager told us they were on with the necessary works to improve safety.”

“ ”

“It was not always clear if people and their loved ones were involved in assessments of people’s needs. Staff reviewed assessments though these reviews did not always identify the issues we found during our assessment. People had enough to eat and drink to stay healthy, though nutritional good practice was not being followed. The provider did not always work with all agencies who needed to be involved in people’s care for the best outcomes. They monitored people’s health to support healthy living, though how this information was used was not always clear. Staff needed to consider consent more when supporting people, specifically around eating.”

“ ”

“People were generally treated with kindness and compassion. Staff protected their privacy and dignity. They treated them as individuals and supported their preferences. People had choice in their care and were encouraged to maintain relationships with family and friends. Staff did not always respond to people in a timely way. The service supported staff wellbeing.”

“ ”

“The service provided information in a way people could understand. People knew how to give feedback and were confident the service would take it seriously and act on it. Some further work could be done to ensure people were consistently involved in decisions about their care. The service was easy to access and worked to eliminate discrimination. People received fair and equal care and treatment. The service needed to ensure they always involved appropriate professionals in people’s care. People were involved in discussions about future planning.”

“ ”

“It was not easy to determine the culture within the home. Governance needed to be significantly improved within the home. Further work was needed to ensure managers better worked with the local community to deliver the best possible care, and work was needed to ensure they were receptive to new ideas. Improvements were needed to ensure there was a culture of continuous improvement. Although leaders were visible, they did not always present as knowledgeable as they should be in all areas. Staff felt able to speak up, but processes and procedures needed to have appropriate oversight. Staff felt supported and were treated equally, free from bullying or harassment.”

“ ”

“This service is being placed in special measures. The purpose of special measures is to ensure that services providing inadequate care make significant improvements. Special measures provide a framework within which we use our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and provide a timeframe within which providers must improve the quality of the care they provide. In instances where CQC have decided to take civil or criminal enforcement…”

The Care Quality Commission · Read the CQC report
REPORT PUBLISHED 15 OCTOBER 2026 · CQC LOCATION ID 1-122831495 View full CQC report

Contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

Record timeline

23 Dec 2010

Registered with CQC

Higher Bank entered the official register.

15 October 2026

Rated Inadequate overall

Report published 15 October 2026 by the Care Quality Commission.

28 October 2026

Record last synced

Details refreshed from CQC's official feed. We re-sync weekly.

Older reports from the CQC's previous inspection approach

Inspected 17 February 2021, not rated

Inspected 10 October 2018, rated Good

Inspected 20 April 2016, rated Good

Registration details

Registration statusActive
Registered23 December 2010
Registered managerIsabel Coughlin
Council areaBlackburn
Integrated care boardNHS Lancashire and South Cumbria Integrated Care Board
Client groupOlder Adults

Location

off Adelaide Terrace, Blackburn, Lancashire, BB2 6EUOpen in Google Maps

Family reviews

No reviews yet for Higher Bank

Reviews on YourCareHome are written by residents and their families. Know this home? Help the next family choosing.

Frequently asked questions

What types of care is Higher Bank registered for?

Higher Bank is registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to provide Residential Care. Listed specialisms include Caring for adults over 65 yrs.

How many Rooms does Higher Bank have?

There are 22 Single Rooms.

What is Higher Bank's CQC rating?

Higher Bank is rated Inadequate by the Care Quality Commission (report published 15 October 2026). The full CQC inspection report is available at cqc.org.uk/location/1-122831495.

How many beds does Higher Bank have?

Higher Bank is registered for 22 beds.

Who is the registered manager at Higher Bank?

The registered manager is Isabel Coughlin.

When was Higher Bank last inspected?

The Care Quality Commission published its latest report on Higher Bank on 15 October 2026.

Where is Higher Bank located?

Higher Bank is located in Blackburn, United Kingdom.

When did Higher Bank register with CQC?

Higher Bank first registered on 23 December 2010.

How Blackburn compares

6 rated care homes nearby

Current overall ratings of the nearest rated homes to Higher Bank.

5 rated Good or better
1
Good or better Below Good

Care homes near Blackburn

Run Higher Bank?

Claim this listing free to add photos, respond to enquiries and keep your details right. It only takes a couple of minutes to verify your connection.

Claim this listing

Badges & awards

Information disclaimer. Information regarding Higher Bank is compiled from multiple sources and provided in good faith. While reasonable steps have been taken to ensure accuracy, no guarantee is given and no liability is accepted for any errors or omissions.