CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hill Barn Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, October 2023
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, person-centred care but identified safety, food choice and management weaknesses.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 21 September 2023. Two inspectors and an Expert by Experience spoke with people, relatives and staff. They observed care and checked care records, medicines, training, audits, incidents and the environment.
The home was caring and responsive. People were treated kindly, their preferences were respected, and relatives said communication was good. Staff knew people well and supported activities, health care and personal routines.
Improvements were needed in safe staffing arrangements, recruitment records, environmental risks, medicines storage, food choices and dementia-friendly design. Management audits were not yet strong enough, although action plans and extra management support were being put in place.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Safe, effective and well-led were rated Requires Improvement, while caring and responsive were rated Good. The previous overall rating was Good in 2018 under the previous provider.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives praised the staff team, and inspectors observed a pleasant and relaxed atmosphere. Staff supported people's dignity, choices and independence.
“We observed staff supporting people with kindness and care. There was a pleasant, relaxed atmosphere with staff and people laughing together.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff knew people well and supported their individual routines, interests and preferences. Care plans included information about people's preferences and social histories.
“People were supported by a stable and consistent staff knew who knew them well. This helped ensure the care met people's individual preferences.” from the report
Health and risk monitoring
Staff understood people's individual risks and monitored areas such as weight loss and falls. They acted to obtain health care when needed.
“The registered manager and staff understood people's risks. Clinical trackers were in place which supported the registered manager to monitor changing levels of risks” from the report
Good relationships and communication
Relatives said communication was good and they were kept involved. The home had a stable, family-like atmosphere.
“The service had a homely feel, with a family ethos and atmosphere.” from the report
Supervision and environmental safety
seriousPeople were left without staff in a lounge for much of the morning and during lunch. Inspectors also found risks involving the first floor, pond fencing, garden access and missed fire and water checks.
“During our inspection we observed people sitting in one of the lounges without staff present for most of the morning.” from the report
Medicines storage
seriousOut-of-date creams and an unsecured denture adhesive were found. Medicines were otherwise administered and recorded safely.
“Most medicines were stored safely, however we found in one room, out of date topical creams and a prescribed emollient.” from the report
Food choices and mealtime support
needs fixingMenus were not always accurate or accessible, and some people were not offered suitable alternatives. People needing help to eat had to wait.
“Improvements were needed to support people to make choices on the food offered. No visual menus were on display.” from the report
Dementia-friendly environment
needs fixingThe home needed refurbishment and clearer signage to help people living with dementia, including signs to identify bedrooms. Damaged walls and skirting boards also made cleaning harder.
“Improvements were needed to ensure the environment met the needs of people living with dementia and incorporate best practice guidance.” from the report
Management checks
needs fixingThe home's audits and provider oversight were not yet robust enough to identify and drive improvements consistently. New audit systems and extra management support were being introduced.
“Governance systems had identified some areas for improvement but were not wholly effective.” from the report
Confidential information
needs fixingA care station was not secure, with care files visible and a computer left unlocked. This meant confidential information could be accessed by visitors and people living in the home.
“This meant confidential information was accessible to visitors and people living in the service.” from the report
- 01What has been done to ensure people are supervised when sitting in communal areas and during mealtimes?
- 02Have the first-floor, pond-fence and garden-access risks now been secured, and are fire and water checks complete?
- 03How are out-of-date creams and other potentially harmful products prevented from being left unsecured?
- 04How will menus be made accurate, visual and accessible, and how will people be offered alternatives and timely help to eat?
- 05What refurbishment, dementia-friendly signage and new audit checks have been completed since the inspection?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions and infection prevention and control; the previous Good ratings from 2018 changed to Requires Improvement for Safe, Effective and Well-led, while Caring and Responsive remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 October 2023 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 Hill Barn Care Home
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- October 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 April 2022.
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
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Norfolk
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 £990 to £1,120 a week. 9 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
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.