CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Hillcroft House Galgate
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were in place. They found appropriate arrangements for visitors, testing, PPE, social distancing, hospital admissions and managing outbreaks.
- 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, November 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control measures were being followed during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 28 October 2020. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control because several people at the home had tested positive for COVID-19.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, testing, personal protective equipment, social distancing, hospital admissions and infection outbreaks. They also found the home clean and hygienic.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report only gives findings about infection control and does not provide an overall quality rating.
Visitor safety
Visits were restricted and risk assessed. Visitors were checked for symptoms and required to follow guidance and wear PPE.
“Visitors were required to follow best practice guidance and wear appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
Family contact
Staff helped people stay in touch with family and friends through social media, video calls and telephone calls.
“People connected with families and friends through social media, video calls and over the telephone.” from the report
PPE and cleanliness
Staff had COVID-19 training and inspectors observed them using PPE appropriately. The home appeared clean and hygienic, with extra cleaning of frequently touched areas.
“We observed staff wore PPE appropriately during our inspection.” from the report
Testing and outbreak planning
People living at the home and staff received regular COVID-19 testing. The provider had plans for separating areas and managing positive results.
“The provider had plans around cohorting and zoning the premises, which helped to reduce the risk when a positive result was received.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently risk assessed, checked for symptoms and supported to use PPE?
- 02How do you help residents keep in touch with their families if visits are restricted?
- 03What happens when someone returns from hospital, including any isolation arrangements?
- 04How often are residents and staff tested, and how are positive results managed?
- 05How often are high-touch areas such as handles and switches cleaned?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures only; the service was inspected but not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 November 2020 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, August 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some records needing improvement.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 17 July 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They reviewed care records, medicine records, training information and quality checks. They also checked that the building was clean and safe.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe, received medicines on time and were treated with kindness and respect. Inspectors saw staff respond promptly and provide person-centred care.
There were two recording issues. Some cream administration records were not signed, and the provider was reviewing how records showed decision-making under the Mental Capacity Act. No regulations were recorded as breached.
Enough staff
Inspectors saw enough staff to meet people's assessed needs, and staff responded promptly when people asked for help.
“During our visit we saw there were enough staff to ensure people received support in line with their assessed needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with dignity and respect. Inspectors saw friendly interactions, with staff taking their time and not rushing people.
“We saw lots of positive interactions between people and staff, no one was rushed, and activities were person centred.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, routines, backgrounds and communication needs. Staff used this information to provide individual care.
“The provider offered care and support that was focused on individual needs, preferences and routines.” from the report
Support at the end of life
The home worked with hospice and community professionals. People's end of life wishes, including cultural and spiritual needs, were recorded.
“The registered manager ensured people received compassionate support at the end of their lives.” from the report
Cream records
minorSome records did not have signatures to show that creams had been applied. The nurse said the recording system would be reviewed.
“Not all the records we looked at had signatures to indicate creams had been applied.” from the report
Mental Capacity Act records
minorThe provider was reviewing whether its records properly showed how decisions were made for people who might lack capacity. Staff understood the principles and applications for authorisation had been made where needed.
“The provider was in the process of reviewing how their documentation reflected how they supported people effectively with decision making in line with law and guidance.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that every medicine and cream administration record is signed and complete?
- 02What changes have you made to records about Mental Capacity Act decisions since this inspection?
- 03How do you make sure staffing levels remain sufficient when people's needs change or staff are absent?
- 04How are people's end of life wishes recorded, reviewed and shared with the staff team?
- 05How can relatives raise a concern, and how will they be told what action has been taken?
This was an unannounced inspection of the care home, including the premises and care provided, and it assessed all five CQC questions; all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 August 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 Hillcroft House Galgate
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 July 2012.
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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.