CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hillbrow
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks, medicines, staffing, the environment and infection control were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had the training and support they needed. People received help with health care, food and drink, and decisions were made in line with the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff understood how people communicated and encouraged them to do more for themselves.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Support plans were personalised and updated when needs changed. People were supported to follow their interests, build skills and take part in community activities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an open culture and managers understood people's needs. Regular audits and feedback were used to identify and make improvements.
What inspectors found, September 2019
Hillbrow was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care that promoted people's independence.
This was a planned inspection on 15 and 20 August 2019, following the home's previous Good rating. One inspector spoke with three people, a relative and five staff, observed care, and reviewed care, medicines and management records.
The inspectors found people were safe and happy. Risks, medicines, staffing, infection control and accidents were managed well. Staff were trained, kind and knew people's needs. People were supported with health care, eating and drinking, communication and decision-making.
Care was personalised and people were encouraged to take part in shopping, cooking, gardening, community activities and other daily tasks. The home was open and well managed, with regular checks and improvements. All five areas were rated Good, which was the same as at the previous inspection.
Kind and respectful staff
People appeared happy and comfortable. Staff responded patiently and treated people with kindness and compassion.
“People were supported by staff who were kind and compassionate.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were given on time and as prescribed. Records were complete, and support was adapted to people's individual needs.
“People continued to receive their medicine on time and as prescribed.” from the report
Independence and community life
People were supported to shop, cook, garden, manage daily tasks and use community services. Staff helped people work towards personal goals.
“People were encouraged and supported to be active within their community and be independent.” from the report
Personalised communication
Staff understood how people expressed themselves, including through signs and gestures. Information was provided in pictures, videos or verbally when needed.
“Staff knew people well and had a good understanding of how people communicated.” from the report
Open management
The home had regular checks of care, medicines, risks, maintenance and health and safety. Actions identified through audits were completed.
“There was an open and transparent culture at the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you currently help residents build independence through shopping, cooking, gardening and community activities?
- 02How are medicines managed for residents who need full support, and for those who manage some medicines themselves?
- 03What dementia-friendly changes have been made to the home since this inspection, and how are they reviewed as residents' needs change?
- 04How do staff support residents who communicate using signs, gestures, pictures or videos?
- 05How are residents and relatives asked about concerns or complaints, and what changes have followed recent feedback?
This was a planned inspection of the care home that looked at all five CQC questions, including the premises, care, records and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 September 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.
What inspectors found, January 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with effective management.
The inspection took place on 7 November 2016. One inspector visited, observed care, spoke with two people, a relative, managers and care staff, and reviewed care files, staff records and quality checks. Staff and relatives who were not present were contacted afterwards.
The home supported eight people with learning disabilities, although it was registered for up to nine. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, suitable training and good support for people's health, food, communication and daily choices.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The report describes care that respected people's dignity, involved families and supported people to take part in activities and community life.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe, and staff knew how to recognise and report possible abuse. Staffing was adjusted when people needed extra support in the community.
“People told us they felt safe residing in the service” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans described people's preferences, interests and communication needs. Plans were updated after changes in health or mobility.
“The plans which we viewed contained descriptions of people who we could recognise from meeting them in the service.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff listened to people and supported their choices. They respected privacy and used picture cards and other methods to communicate with people who were non-verbal.
“Staff were kind and treated people with dignity and respect.” from the report
Good support for rights and health
Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act and had made appropriate applications under the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Healthcare appointments, dental care and vision tests were supported when needed.
“The manager and staff showed a good understanding of their responsibilities and had made the appropriate DoLS applications in recent months.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff said the manager valued their views and was accessible. The home used meetings, feedback, audits and checks to monitor care.
“There was a number of quality monitoring systems in place.” from the report
One audit had missing dates
minorInspectors found missing dates on one quality audit. The manager acted immediately and brought the systems up to date.
“Where we had highlighted missing dates on one of the audits, the registered manager responded immediately to bring all systems up to date.” from the report
- 01How will you make sure care plans stay up to date if my relative's health or mobility changes?
- 02How do you communicate with people who cannot speak, and what communication aids are available?
- 03How do you decide when extra staff are needed, especially for trips into the community?
- 04How are families involved in care reviews and decisions about healthcare or future accommodation?
- 05What checks are now in place to prevent missing dates or other gaps in quality monitoring records?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, with observations, discussions and reviews of care, staff and quality records. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 January 2017 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 Hillbrow
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 April 2014.
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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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 £980 to £1,260 a week. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.