CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hilton Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks, including PPE, testing, social distancing, isolation, hygiene and visiting arrangements.
- 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, April 2021
Hilton Residential Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about its infection prevention and control arrangements.
Inspectors visited the home on 24 March 2021. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic. They checked infection prevention and control measures, rather than carrying out a full inspection of the service.
The home had updated visiting arrangements and gave relatives information to help them plan visits safely. Other ways to keep in touch included phone calls, emails, social media and window visits.
Inspectors were assured about social distancing, isolation, personal protective equipment, testing, cleanliness and the layout of the home. Staff had received infection control training, and the manager regularly observed their practice.
The service was inspected but not rated overall. Safe was also recorded as inspected but not rated, so this report does not provide ratings for the other areas of care.
Visiting arrangements
The home had changed its visiting policy in response to government guidance and gave relatives up-to-date information. It also offered several alternatives to face-to-face visits.
“A variety of alternatives to visits had been provided which included; phone calls, emails, social media platforms and window visiting.” from the report
Staff infection control
Staff had training on PPE and infection control. Inspectors saw staff following current PPE guidance, and the manager regularly checked their practice.
“Staff had received training via video link on the correct use of personal protective equipment, (PPE) and infection control policies, (IPC).” from the report
Testing and infection prevention
Regular COVID-19 testing was taking place, with extra testing when someone developed symptoms. Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements to prevent and manage outbreaks.
“Testing for Covid-19 had been completed regularly. When someone showed symptoms between regular testing they had additional testing.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean, with PPE available in designated areas. Improvements had also been made to floor coverings and furniture.
“The home was clean, there were designated areas with PPE available throughout the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have the visiting arrangements changed since the inspection, and what alternatives are available if visits cannot take place?
- 02How often are residents and staff being tested now, and what happens if someone develops symptoms?
- 03How do you check that staff are using PPE and following infection control procedures correctly?
- 04What cleaning and environmental improvements have been made since the inspection?
- 05When was the home last fully inspected and rated in areas not covered by this targeted inspection?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not provide a full service rating and Safe was recorded as inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 April 2021 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, February 2019
Hilton Residential Home was rated Good overall, but inspectors found that safe care still Required Improvement.
This was an unannounced, planned comprehensive inspection on 5 February 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines, staff records, quality checks and the building.
The overall rating was Good. Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were also rated Good. The home had improved since the previous inspection, including repairs to the building and some activities.
Safe was rated Requires Improvement. Inspectors found two occasions when staff had not sought medical advice after head injuries. Records for people staying temporarily were not detailed enough, although these were corrected during the inspection. The home also needed to make sure planned activities happened consistently.
Inspectors found kind and respectful care, suitable staffing, safe medicines management and good support with nutrition and healthcare. They also found that legal authorisations had not initially been sought for four people who could not leave freely and needed constant supervision.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw warm relationships and found that privacy, dignity and independence were respected.
“Staff knew people well and displayed positive, warm and familiar relationships with the people they interacted with.” from the report
Medicines managed safely
Trained staff gave medicines safely and records were completed accurately. People were supported to manage their own medicines where possible.
“Our review of medicines records and observation of staff administering medicines showed that people received their medicines safely from trained members of staff whose competence had been checked.” from the report
Suitable staffing and training
Inspectors found enough staff to support people safely. Staff had relevant training and understood people's needs.
“Our observations showed there were adequate numbers of staff to support people safely.” from the report
Building repairs completed
The previous inspection found problems with maintenance. At this inspection, the necessary repairs and improvements had been made.
“At this inspection we found all the necessary improvements had been made and faults and repairs had been addressed.” from the report
Good management oversight
The home used audits and monitoring checks to identify shortfalls and improve care. Staff and relatives described the management as supportive and approachable.
“A variety of regular audits and quality monitoring was taking place.” from the report
Medical advice after head injuries
seriousInspectors found two occasions when staff had not sought medical advice after people experienced head injuries. The manager said staff would be reminded to use tele-medicine facilities.
“Improvements were required to ensure staff sought medical advice where people had experienced head related injuries.” from the report
Temporary residents' records
needs fixingCare records and risk assessments for people staying temporarily were not detailed enough to guide staff. The manager completed the missing plans during the inspection.
“Care records for people living at the home temporarily also known as respite care, were not robust and did not adequately provide guidance to staff.” from the report
Legal authorisations
seriousThe home had not initially applied for authorisations for four people who could not leave freely and needed constant supervision. The manager applied for authorisations shortly after the inspection.
“We asked the registered manager to take immediate action and they took action soon after our inspection.” from the report
Activities not always delivered
needs fixingActivities had improved since the previous inspection, but the plan was not always followed. Staff time had not been allocated clearly enough for activities.
“The activity plan was not always fulfilled as planned.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure staff seek medical advice promptly after any head injury?
- 02How are care plans and risk assessments checked for people staying temporarily or receiving respite care?
- 03What has changed to ensure activities in the planner are delivered as planned?
- 04Which residents currently have legal authorisations in place if they cannot leave freely?
- 05How do your audits check that falls risks, legal restrictions and care records are being managed safely?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five rating areas, following the previous Requires Improvement rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 February 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 Hilton Residential Home
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 January 2011.
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.