CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Greenhill House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, the use of protective equipment, testing, cleaning and outbreak planning. They also found that visiting arrangements enabled people to see relatives safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control, safe visiting arrangements and measures to manage COVID-19 pressures.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 25 January 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and the effect of COVID-19 staffing pressures.
The home had systems for checking visitors' symptoms, vaccination status, temperature and test results. Visitors were encouraged to use personal protective equipment and sanitise their hands. Two visitor pods gave families an alternative to visiting in bedrooms.
Inspectors found the home was clean, with regular cleaning and infection control audits. Policies for preventing and managing outbreaks were up to date. Staff training was monitored, and the home had measures to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall quality rating or a rated result for Safe.
Infection control
The home had up-to-date policies, regular cleaning and infection control audits. Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing and managing infection risks.
“We were assured that the provider's infection prevention and control policy was up to date.” from the report
Safe visiting
Visitors were checked on arrival and were encouraged to use protective equipment and hand sanitiser. Two visitor pods offered an alternative to visiting in bedrooms.
“The provider introduced two visitors pods that could be used as an alternative to visiting people in their bedrooms.” from the report
Outbreak planning
The home had a plan for dealing with an outbreak, including zoning arrangements and steps to reduce cross infection.
“This included how zoning principles would be used to ensure people's safety as well as safe management of risks of cross infection.” from the report
Staff support and training
Staff training was up to date and monitored. Staff said they felt supported and listened to by management.
“Staff told us they felt supported and listened to by management.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitor checks, testing and protective equipment arrangements working now?
- 02How often can relatives use the visitor pods, and when would bedroom visits be allowed?
- 03What staffing pressures were present during the inspection, and how did they affect people living in the home?
- 04How would the home use zoning and other measures if there was an infection outbreak?
- 05What action is taken when infection control audits identify a problem?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 February 2022 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.
What inspectors found, June 2019
Greenhill House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was an unannounced inspection over two days, on 13 and 15 May 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and managers. They also checked care plans, medicine records, staff files, training records, rotas, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led care. Inspectors found enough staff, suitable risk assessments, safe medicines systems and staff who understood safeguarding. People were supported to make choices, received personalised care and were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.
The home had activities, links with the local community and systems for responding to complaints and learning from incidents. This was a planned inspection because the previous rating was Good. The home remained Good overall, as it was at the inspection published in December 2016.
Enough trained staff
People and relatives said there were enough staff, and inspectors saw that staff had time to support and talk with people. Recruitment checks were described as robust.
“People were supported by enough staff to meet their needs.” from the report
Personalised choices
Care plans recorded people's needs, likes and dislikes. People were involved in decisions about their care, activities and daily routines.
“People received responsive care and support which was personalised to their individual needs and wishes and promoted independence.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed staff treating people with kindness and speaking respectfully. Privacy, dignity and cultural and religious needs were respected.
“We observed people were treated with kindness and care by staff.” from the report
Safe medicines arrangements
Staff who gave medicines were trained and assessed as competent. Medicines were stored safely and there were clear instructions for medicines given when needed.
“Systems were in place to ensure people received their medicines safely.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could take part in varied activities, trips and local events according to their interests and wishes. The home had developed links with local groups and businesses.
“People participated in a range of activities that met their individual needs and encouraged them to continue to follow interests.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you check that staffing levels remain enough for my relative's needs, especially at busy times?
- 02How will my relative and our family be involved in writing and reviewing their care plan?
- 03How are medicines given when needed, and how do you record and review their effects?
- 04What activities and community visits would suit my relative's interests and abilities?
- 05How can we raise a concern or complaint, and how will we be told what action was taken?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions, carried out over two days; inspectors spoke with 12 people, two visitors and six staff, and reviewed a selection of records. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 June 2019 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 Greenhill House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 November 2010.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
76 live-in carers within about two hours of Somerset
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £1,020 to £1,370 a week. 62 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
“She was not phased by anything, she was adaptable, kind & gave us complete confidence to go away & not worry about a thing!”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.