Hillbrow Residential Care Home Limited

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities.

The leadership team promoted a warm, consistent culture where people felt respected and part of a close community. People described Hillbrow as “a home from home” and said staff were “very friendly and gentle” and that they felt “safe and happy here”.

Relatives echoed this, praising the “kind and very caring” staff and recognising the service had “kept the nucleus of the home exactly the same… seamless” following provider changes.

Staff interactions were friendly and patient, contributing to a supportive culture where people said, “this is a happy place, the staff are very good”.

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

Leaders were visible, approachable and well regarded. People consistently described the registered manager as “very easy to talk to… a really nice girl” and “a good manager, she’s really nice”. Relatives also praised leadership, saying “the manager and the carers have kept the nucleus of the home exactly the same… it’s been seamless.”

Staff reported they felt well supported; kitchen staff described feeling “well informed and well supported” and that they enjoyed their roles.

Leadership actions, such as addressing concerns raised and implementing personalised plans, demonstrated compassion and responsive management.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

People and relatives said they felt comfortable raising concerns and were confident the manager listened and acted. One relative said, “I’d like to applaud them… they really are kind and very caring” and felt confident to “go and find staff” when needed.

One person reported raising concerns about “a rude staff member” and said that after speaking to the manager “now there’s no problem with them at all.” Complaints records showed issues raised by staff about a colleague’s attitude had been addressed through performance management, resulting in improvements noted by the affected person.

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

Staff members described a positive workplace where everyone was respected and included. Staff felt their voices mattered in how the service was run, and they appreciated the supportive culture. This included a commitment to both people’s diverse needs and providing the right adjustments so staff could succeed at work.

The provider had policies in place that supported equality, diversity and inclusion and staff had completed training to help their understanding.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

The provider used regular audits and quality checks across all areas to ensure the service remained safe and maintained high standards of care Governance systems helped ensure people received safe care, with regular audits for accidents, incidents and call bell response times (typically 4–7 minutes).

Leaders acknowledged gaps in fire safety oversight and had already taken steps to improve checks and accountability following identified omissions.

People consistently told us the home was well managed; one person said “It’s a good place… I would recommend the home to anyone”.

Records showed care plans and risk assessments were regularly reviewed and detailed, enabling sustainable, safe care delivery.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

The service maintained strong links with the community. People spoke positively about regular visits from churches, local museums, book clubs, entertainers and outings facilitated through Devon Mobility.

A long‑standing visitor said: “It really is lovely here… The staff are absolute gems… I would recommend this place… We’re really lucky to have this service locally.”

Staff worked collaboratively with external professionals, with relatives noting effective involvement of GPs, speech and language therapist and mental‑health teams. One person said, “The GP had made an urgent referral” when needed.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research.

The provider promoted learning and development, through their governance systems, including regular feedback from people and relatives, and regular reviews of people’s individual needs and risks. There was evidence of learning through complaints, surveys, audits and general feedback. Action plans were developed and showed when shortfalls had been addressed. Issues were discussed in staff meetings andhandover meetings.

The provider took a proactive approach to the inspection and was receptive to feedback provided.