CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Hillside Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, visiting arrangements, use of protective equipment, testing and staffing during the visit.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection-control and visiting arrangements, with enough staff seen during the visit.
Inspectors visited the home on 28 February 2022. The visit was announced shortly before arrival and was part of a targeted check of infection control, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
They found safe visiting arrangements, including COVID-19 testing, protective equipment, hand sanitiser and temperature checks. Staff and visitors followed infection-control measures, and the home had cleaning schedules, audits and testing arrangements.
The home had enough staff to meet people's needs during the visit. Agency staff were used when needed. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a full overall quality rating.
Safe visiting
The home had visiting arrangements designed to reduce the risk of COVID-19 spreading. Visitors were tested, given protective equipment and asked about symptoms.
“The provider implemented visiting arrangements that were safe and helped to control and prevent the spread of infections.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors saw staff using protective equipment correctly. The home also had cleaning schedules, infection-control audits and testing arrangements.
“We saw staff using PPE correctly and safely.” from the report
Staffing
The provider maintained its assessed staffing levels, including by using agency staff when needed. Inspectors saw enough staff to support people during the visit.
“At the time of our inspection, we observed there was sufficient staff to support people.” from the report
Up-to-date guidance
The home kept up with government and local guidance about isolation, visiting and outbreaks.
“The provider kept up to date with government and local guidance on self-isolation, visiting and outbreaks to ensure they were following it correctly.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have your visiting arrangements changed since the inspection on 28 February 2022?
- 02How do you now manage infection outbreaks and protect residents and visitors?
- 03How many permanent and agency staff are currently working on each shift?
- 04How do you make sure staff and visiting professionals follow your current infection-control procedures?
- 05When was the home last given a full inspection and ratings for caring, effective, responsive and well-led services?
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 and the other key questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 March 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, April 2019
Hillside Nursing Home is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some improvements still needed to risk assessments and medicines guidance.
This was an unannounced inspection on 2 April 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, visitors, managers and staff. They reviewed care records, medicines, training, staff files, complaints, audits and safety checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine management, suitable training, kind care, personalised care plans and effective management systems.
There were still some areas to improve. Behaviour charts were not being reviewed for patterns and triggers, some topical medicines did not have written guidance, and parts of the building needed updating to be more dementia friendly. These points did not change the overall Good rating.
Enough staff
People were generally supported promptly, including people who needed one-to-one support. Inspectors found the staffing problems from the previous inspection had been addressed.
“We saw that staff were generally available when people wanted them and they responded to people's requests quickly.” from the report
Safe medicines
Inspectors found that people received their medicines as prescribed and staff recorded this correctly. Managers and nurses also carried out checks on medicines.
“We checked MAR charts and found that people received their medicine as prescribed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff treated people with kindness and respected their privacy, dignity, independence and choices.
“We saw staff throughout our inspection were sensitive and discreet when supporting people.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's needs, histories, preferences, likes and dislikes. Activities and communication support were also planned around individuals.
“Care plans were personalised and contained information on people's support needs, histories, preferences, likes and dislikes.” from the report
Improved management
The home had introduced audits, meetings and improvement plans. Inspectors found that the three previous breaches had been addressed.
“A number of improvements had been made to the home since our last inspection and breaches we had previously identified that may have resulted in people not receiving safe care, had been addressed.” from the report
Behaviour risk reviews
needs fixingBehaviour charts were being completed, but they were not reviewed for patterns or trends. This meant risk assessments did not always include enough information about triggers and ways to calm situations.
“However, we found that charts were not being reviewed to identify any patterns or trends to make people's risk assessments more robust in regard to triggers and de-escalation techniques.” from the report
Guidance for topical creams
needs fixingWritten instructions were not in place for some medicines given when needed, specifically topical creams. The concern was discussed with the manager, who said guidance would be created.
“However, we found that there were no PRN protocols in place for topical creams.” from the report
Dementia-friendly environment
minorSome parts of the building needed updating to make them more suitable for people with dementia. Improvement work had started and further work was planned.
“Some areas of the premises and environment needed updating to make it more dementia friendly.” from the report
- 01How do you now review behaviour charts to identify patterns, triggers and effective ways to calm situations?
- 02Have written protocols for topical creams been completed, and how are staff checked on their use?
- 03Which dementia-friendly building improvements have been completed since the inspection?
- 04How do you make sure staffing levels continue to match each person's changing support needs?
- 05How have you maintained the improvements that addressed the three breaches found at the previous inspection?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality and safety of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 April 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 Hillside Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2017Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 May 2017.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Havering
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 £1,230 a week. 81 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Sidonia is a first class live-in carer whose dedication and thoughtfulness made her stay a happy experience.”
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
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.