CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 37 Hill Top View
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, personalised risk assessments and secure medicines arrangements. Staff understood safeguarding and infection control procedures.
- Effective?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and regularly reviewed. Staff had relevant training, and people were supported with food, healthcare, communication, their environment and decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors observed kind and compassionate interactions. Staff supported people's dignity, privacy, independence and involvement in decisions as far as possible.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care and activities were personalised to people's preferences. People were supported to access the community, maintain family relationships and use information in formats they could understand.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an approachable management team, regular audits, staff supervision and evidence that learning was used to improve care. This rating improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Langston Care Limited - 37 Hill Top View was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with Well-led improving from Requires Improvement.
This was a planned inspection on 12 September 2019. Two inspectors and an assistant inspector observed all three people living at the home, spoke with five staff and checked care, medicine, activity, recruitment and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, detailed care plans, medicines given as prescribed and support with food, healthcare, activities and relationships.
People were treated with kindness and their privacy, dignity, independence and choices were supported. The home used some restrictive interventions as a last resort and said these were person-centred and based on positive behaviour support principles.
The overall rating remained Good, the same as at the previous inspection. Well-led improved from Requires Improvement to Good.
Consistent staffing
There were enough staff to meet people's needs. Many staff had worked at the home for several years, helping to keep support consistent.
“People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff to meet their needs.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans and activity plans reflected individual needs and preferences. Inspectors saw people supported to take part in activities they enjoyed, including swimming and lunch in the community.
“People received care that was personalised to their needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were attentive and communicated kindly. People's privacy, dignity and independence were promoted during daily care.
“Staff spoke to people in a kind and compassion way and were attentive to their needs.” from the report
Improved leadership
The management team was described as supportive and approachable. Audits, supervision and external review were used to monitor and improve the service.
“At this inspection this key question has improved to good.” from the report
People may need help to raise concerns
minorPeople relied on others to speak up if something was wrong. Families should ask how the home helps each person communicate worries or complaints.
“People had access to complaints procedure however people relied on others to speak up for them if something was not right.” from the report
Liberty safeguards were awaiting assessment
needs fixingApplications had been made for authorisation where people may be deprived of their liberty, but the local authority had not assessed them by the inspection.
“Applications to deprive people of their liberty had been made and were awaiting assessment by the local authority.” from the report
- 01What support would my relative have to communicate a complaint or say that something was not right?
- 02What is the current position on any applications to deprive people of their liberty?
- 03What restrictive interventions, if any, might be used for my relative, and how would these be reviewed?
- 04How would my relative choose daily activities, meals and time in the community?
- 05How would you involve our family in healthcare decisions and discussions about future or end of life wishes?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall service; the previous overall rating was Good, while Well-led had previously been Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 November 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, April 2017
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe care, but quality monitoring still needed improvement.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 31 January 2017. One inspector observed care, spoke with two staff members and managers, and reviewed one care plan, management records and three staff files. There were three people living in the home.
Inspectors rated Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive as Good. They found people were protected from abuse, supported by trained staff, given medicines correctly, and offered care suited to their needs and preferences. Staff were kind and respected people's dignity, privacy and independence.
Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. The home had introduced some quality checks, but these did not give a full picture of care and safety. Accident and incident records were not analysed for patterns, so the information was not always used to improve people's care. The overall rating was Good.
Safe support
Staff knew people's risks and used consistent approaches when people became anxious or showed behaviour that could put them or others at risk.
“People were protected from abuse and poor treatment because staff were suitably recruited and understood how to keep them safe.” from the report
Kind care
Inspectors saw friendly, polite and reassuring support. Staff noticed when people needed help and protected their dignity.
“We saw that staff provided friendly and polite support to people.” from the report
Personalised activities
Staff knew people's likes and dislikes and recorded whether activities were enjoyable, helping them plan leisure time around individual preferences.
“Each person had an activity plan in place.” from the report
Health and medicines
People received their medicines as needed, and staff supported their nutrition and access to healthcare professionals.
“People had support from healthcare professionals to support and maintain their wellbeing.” from the report
Quality checks
needs fixingThe provider's audits did not yet give a complete overview of the quality and safety of care. This was an ongoing weakness from the previous inspection.
“However further improvements were still required to provide an overview of the quality of people's care and safety.” from the report
Incident analysis
needs fixingAccidents and incidents were recorded and passed to managers, but managers did not analyse them for patterns. This meant lessons might not be used to change people's support.
“However there was no management analysis to identify if there were trends or patterns to the incidents.” from the report
Ratings poster
minorThe rating poster from the previous inspection was not on display as required. The manager identified a more secure place for it during the inspection.
“We noted that the ratings poster from the last inspection was not on display as required.” from the report
- 01How do you now analyse accidents and incidents for repeated patterns?
- 02What audits are currently used to check the quality and safety of people's care?
- 03How do you make sure audit findings lead to completed improvements?
- 04How do you make sure each person's activity plan continues to reflect what they enjoy?
- 05How can relatives raise concerns, and how are complaints recorded and reviewed?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five rating areas, but inspectors could not speak in depth with people using the service or their relatives and reviewed only one care plan. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 April 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 37 Hill Top View
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Staffordshire
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. 85 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
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.