CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hillside Homes
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm, and there were enough suitably skilled staff. Inspectors found inconsistencies in personal emergency evacuation plans and handwritten accident and emergency information that was not always clear to read.
- Effective?
- Good
- People were supported with healthcare, food, communication and everyday choices. Staff had relevant training and understood people's individual needs.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff provided kind and compassionate care and respected people's privacy, dignity and independence. People and their families were involved in care planning and decisions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and staff supported people to communicate, maintain relationships and follow their interests. Inspectors gave feedback that plans could include more about future goals and equality and diversity needs.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers were visible and approachable, and staff felt able to raise concerns. Quality checks, incident reviews and improvement plans were in place.
What inspectors found, May 2022
Hillside Homes was rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe and person-centred care, with some care records needing improvement.
Inspectors visited on 16 and 21 March 2022 without announcing the visits. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and other professionals. They also reviewed care, medicines, recruitment, training and management records.
The home supported five adults with learning disabilities and mental health conditions, although three people were living there during the inspection. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and supported to make choices, stay independent, access healthcare and take part in activities.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors recommended improving care records because emergency information was not always consistent or easy to read. The overall rating remained Good, as it was at the previous inspection, although Caring fell from Outstanding to Good.
Choice and independence
People were supported to make decisions, pursue their interests and have control over their lives.
“Staff supported people to have the maximum possible choice, control and independence, be independent and they had control over their own lives.” from the report
Kind relationships
Inspectors saw warm relationships between people and staff. Staff used respectful communication and understood people's individual needs.
“People received kind and compassionate care from staff who used positive, respectful language which people understood and responded well to.” from the report
Good staffing
There were enough staff with the right skills to meet people's needs and keep them safe. A new care worker had also been recruited to support more activities.
“The numbers and skills of staff matched the needs of people using the service.” from the report
Strong management
Managers were involved in the home and used audits, incident reviews and an improvement plan to monitor quality.
“There were effective systems in place to monitor the quality and standards of the service.” from the report
Care records were not always clear
minorEmergency evacuation plans were not always consistent between care folders. Accident and emergency information was handwritten and could be difficult to read, so the provider was asked to review its record-keeping practice.
“Safety checks were carried out on the environment and equipment used. Personal emergency evacuation plans were in place and instructed staff on how to safely evacuate people in the event of an emergency, however inspectors found there were inconsistencies in the versions in people's care folders.” from the report
Care plans could be fuller
minorInspectors gave feedback that care plans should include more detail about people's future aspirations and goals, and about cultural, religious, identity and relationship needs.
“We gave feedback to the provider how care plans could be strengthened further. For example, by including more information about people's future aspirations and goals.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure personal emergency evacuation plans are consistent and up to date in every care folder?
- 02How do you make sure accident and emergency information is clear and easy for staff and health professionals to read?
- 03How are each person's future goals and aspirations recorded and reviewed?
- 04How do you record and support people's cultural, religious, identity and personal relationship needs?
- 05What additional training or support do staff receive when people become distressed?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control measures. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 May 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.
Every inspection of Hillside Homes
3 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 October 2019.
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
89 live-in carers within about an hour of North Northamptonshire
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. 76 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
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.