CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Russell Hill
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and reviewed, premises and equipment were maintained, staffing was sufficient, and medicines were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff used health guidance and worked with healthcare professionals to support people's health. People were supported with eating, drinking, exercise, healthcare appointments and decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were described as kind, warm and respectful. They knew people well, supported their communication and choices, and protected their privacy and dignity.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Care plans reflected people's preferences, communication methods, goals and daily needs. Inspectors found clear examples of improved communication, health, confidence, activities, relationships and independence.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers were approachable and supportive. The home gathered views, carried out audits and checks, acted on shortfalls, and worked with other professionals to improve care.
What inspectors found, March 2018
Russell Hill was rated Good overall, with Outstanding personalised support and positive outcomes for people.
Inspectors visited the home without warning on 7 February 2018. They spoke with managers, care staff, a nurse, a relative and a visiting healthcare professional. They also observed care, checked three people's care records, three staff records, medicines and management records.
The home supported eight people with learning disabilities at the time of the inspection. Inspectors found people were safe, received their medicines as prescribed, and were supported by trained staff. They also found kind and respectful care, good health support, and suitable systems for checking quality.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. It was rated Outstanding for Responsive because care was highly personalised and had led to clear improvements in people's health, communication, independence and quality of life.
The home had been rated Good overall and Outstanding for Responsive at the previous inspection in June 2015. These ratings remained unchanged.
Personalised care
Support was tailored to each person's needs, preferences, communication and goals. People and relatives were involved in planning and reviewing care.
“people continued to receive highly personalised care and support, tailored to meet their individual needs” from the report
Positive outcomes
Inspectors saw improvements in people's communication, health, confidence, activities, relationships and independence.
“The examples of person centred and specifically tailored support we saw above was evident and apparent for each person using the service so that they were supported to live an active and fulfilling life.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and supported them at their own pace. Privacy, dignity, choices and preferred communication methods were respected.
“Staff were friendly and chatty with people and they encouraged people to use their preferred method of communication” from the report
Safe medicines and premises
Inspectors found medicines were stored securely and given as prescribed. The premises was clean, maintained and free from slip and trip hazards.
“Medicines were stored safely and securely and people received them as prescribed.” from the report
Health support
The home worked with nurses, therapists and other healthcare professionals. Staff supported people with appointments, exercise, nutrition and epilepsy care.
“Staff liaised with health and social care professionals to ensure effective care and support was provided to people.” from the report
Continued assurance about past issues
minorA relative said concerns had been dealt with, but wanted managers to continue assuring them that the same issues would not happen again. Inspectors did not identify a related breach.
“this aspect of the service could be improved by managers through continued assurance that these issues would not arise again.” from the report
- 01How will you make sure my relative's care plan reflects their communication methods, preferences and personal goals?
- 02How do you review risks such as falls, choking or epilepsy for each person?
- 03What activities, education or community opportunities would be available for my relative?
- 04How would you keep our family informed about changes in our relative's health or the results of healthcare appointments?
- 05How are complaints and concerns recorded, investigated and checked to make sure problems do not happen again?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions and the overall rating, including care, accommodation, medicines, staffing and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 March 2018 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 Russell Hill
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 October 2010.
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 Croydon
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. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Terry has been of invaluable help to our family while working as a part-time live-in carer for our mother for approximately 6 months”
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.