CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Northhill Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors found people received safe care overall, but monitoring of accidents and safeguarding concerns had lapsed. They also found some cleaning and emergency evacuation arrangements needed improvement.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and preferences were assessed, healthcare referrals were made when needed, and staff had the training to support people. The meal experience was mostly positive, although communication methods for people living with dementia could be improved.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff knew people well and treated them with kindness, dignity and respect. People and relatives were involved in discussions about care and were supported to maintain independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were largely personalised and regularly reviewed. People were offered activities and support to maintain relationships, but end of life plans needed more detail about people's wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had audits, action plans and approachable management. However, some problems found by inspectors had not been identified by the home's own checks, and meetings with residents and relatives were not always recorded.
What inspectors found, July 2022
Rated Good overall, but inspectors rated the home Requires Improvement for safety because incident monitoring and some safety checks were not strong enough.
This was an unannounced inspection on 18 and 25 May 2022. Inspectors spoke with six residents, six relatives and eight staff. They observed care and checked care plans, medicine records, recruitment files, training records and management audits.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, caring, responsive and well-led care were all rated Good. Inspectors found kind staff, suitable care plans, safe medicines management, activities and good support with healthcare and personal choices.
Safety was rated Requires Improvement. Incident monitoring had not been consistent, some hard-to-reach areas needed a deeper clean, and personal emergency evacuation plans were not easy to access. The manager responded to feedback and introduced a grab bag for these plans after the inspection.
Inspectors made recommendations about monitoring incidents and recording end of life wishes. They found no evidence that the identified recording and monitoring problems had affected people's care.
Kind and personal care
Staff knew residents well and understood their individual needs. Feedback about their kindness, respect and support was strongly positive.
“Staff knew people and their individual needs well. Staff spoke about people with kindness and compassion.” from the report
Medicines managed safely
Inspectors found medicines were ordered, stored and disposed of safely. Medicine stocks and records checked were correct.
“Medicines were ordered, stored and disposed of safely including controlled drugs.” from the report
Good support with health
People were supported to maintain their health and wellbeing, with timely referrals to healthcare professionals when needed.
“People were supported to maintain their health and wellbeing. Timely referrals were made to medical professionals when required.” from the report
Activities and dementia-friendly surroundings
People could take part in activities and events. The home had adapted areas, clear signs and sensory boards to support people living with dementia.
“The provider had considered the needs of people living with dementia, and we saw sensory boards situated on the downstairs corridor.” from the report
Incident monitoring
seriousRegular audits of accidents had stopped, and checks of accidents and safeguarding concerns were not recorded. Inspectors recommended getting advice on how to monitor incidents effectively.
“Regular audits of accidents had ceased in September 2021.” from the report
Areas needing a deeper clean
needs fixingThe home was generally clean, but dirt and debris had built up in some difficult-to-reach places, including underneath sinks, tables and chairs.
“We found some areas of the home would benefit from a deeper clean to remove built up dirt and debris in hard to reach spots, such as on the undersides of bathroom sinks, tables and chairs.” from the report
Emergency evacuation information
needs fixingPersonal emergency evacuation plans were kept in care files rather than in an easily accessible place. The manager said a grab bag containing the plans had been introduced after the inspection.
“We found PEEPs were stored on people's care file and not in a place which was readily accessible in the event of an emergency.” from the report
End of life plans
needs fixingEnd of life plans did not always contain enough detail about people's wishes and preferred priorities for care. Inspectors recommended seeking guidance on advance care planning.
“People's end of life plans would benefit from more detail about people's wishes and preferred priorities for care at the end stages of their lives.” from the report
Meal choices for people with dementia
minorPeople living with dementia were not always given enough help to choose their meal independently. Inspectors suggested using visual aids, such as showing plated meal options.
“Improvements were needed to better support people living with dementia to make a choice about what meal they would like.” from the report
- 01What records and audits are now used to monitor accidents and safeguarding concerns?
- 02What cleaning checks make sure difficult-to-reach areas stay free from built-up dirt and debris?
- 03Where is the grab bag containing personal emergency evacuation plans kept, and how often is it checked?
- 04How are residents' end of life wishes and preferred priorities for care now recorded?
- 05What visual or other communication aids are used to help people living with dementia choose their meals?
This was a planned inspection based on the service's registration and covered all five key questions, including infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 July 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 2021
Inspected but not rated; infection controls were mostly assured, but admission isolation did not follow guidance.
Inspectors carried out an announced, targeted inspection on 31 March 2021. It focused on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, rather than the full range of care.
They found good arrangements for visitors, including hand sanitising, PPE, temperature checks and lateral flow tests. Staff were trained, the home was clean, testing was in place and people were supported to keep in touch with relatives.
Inspectors were not assured that people admitted from hospital or the community were isolated for 14 days unless they had tested positive. The provider said it would follow the guidance immediately and seek further advice.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or a rated judgement for the wider service.
Visitor safety
Visitors had to follow PPE, hand hygiene, temperature-checking and testing arrangements.
“Effective systems were in place to ensure visitors to the service followed government guidelines for wearing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE).” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the environment clean and hygienic, with cleaning schedules in place.
“The environment was clean and hygienic. Cleaning schedules were in place.” from the report
Keeping families connected
People could stay in contact with relatives through video calls, window visits and visits arranged under government guidance.
“People were supported to maintain contact with their relatives in different ways including video calls and window visits.” from the report
Isolation for new admissions
seriousThe home tested new admissions but did not isolate them for 14 days unless they tested positive. Inspectors signposted the provider to further resources, and the provider said it would implement the guidance immediately.
“However, they did not isolate a person for fourteen days as per the government guidance unless they had tested positive.” from the report
- 01How do you now isolate people arriving from hospital or the community, and for how long?
- 02When did you put the promised immediate change to admission procedures into practice?
- 03What advice did you receive from Public Health England about safely admitting new residents?
- 04How do you check that visitor PPE, temperature checks and lateral flow testing arrangements are followed?
- 05How are residents currently supported to have contact with their relatives?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, so the other four CQC questions and the overall quality of the home were not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 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.
Every inspection of Northhill Care Home
3 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 June 2020.
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
90 live-in carers within about an hour of Sheffield
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 £1,020 to £1,270 a week. 76 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Beatrice was a talent dementia carer whose professionalism and dedication allowed mums wishes to remain in her own her come true.”
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.