Hillside Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained the same. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People’s care plans were personalised and demonstrated that people, and their relatives were involved in the planning of their care. Where healthcare professionals were involved in people’s care, we saw their instructions were included in care plans, such as positive behaviour care plans. People’s needs and preferences were outlined in care plans for staff to follow.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Staff understood the challenges of their local communities and how to ensure people were involved. They ensured people were supported in a way that meant their care was consistent, for example by ensuring there was a staff group who knew people’s needs well. Staff worked with external parties to ensure it was safe to go out and to ensure people’s choices were respected. For example, where there were certain risks when going out, trips were carefully planned to ensure the safety of the person and the wider public.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Information, such as the complaints procedure, was available in various formats and the registered manager told us they were able to provide these as soon as they were required. Whilst the people living in the service at the time of the assessment were able to follow standard formats, the provider understood their responsibilities in relation to the Accessible Information Standard. The Accessible Information Standard sets out how providers and commissioners of NHS and publicly funded adult social care services should ensure disabled people and people with impairments or sensory loss can access and understand information.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The provider sought feedback from people who used the service, their relatives and staff. Whilst there had been no areas of improvement raised, the provider continued to actively seek out feedback. The provider sought out feedback through a variety of ways. Surveys were available in various formats to ensure people were able to be actively involved. Team meetings were taking place, and we saw these involved discussions around health and safety, people’s needs and infection control.

The provider had a complaints procedure in place, but they told us they had not received any complaints recently. The registered manager told us they understood their responsibility to record, investigate and share outcomes of complaints.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People were supported to access services when they needed these. The premises and equipment were adapted to be suitable for people’s needs at the time of the assessment and the provider worked well with partners to provide further support where necessary and to make adjustments to the environment.

People were supported by staff to ensure they had equal access to care and treatment. The provider and the wider staff team understood their responsibilities to be aware of discrimination and inequalities which could have an impact on people accessing care and support.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

People and their relatives told us that people lived in an environment that treated them in line with their rights to live free from inequalities. The registered manager understood their legal responsibilities in relation to equality and human rights, including discrimination, protected characteristics and they had an understanding of how reasonable adjustments support equity in experience and outcomes. A visiting healthcare professional told us, “[Registered manager] is reasonably well organised, attends my clinic appointments on time and advocates for residents.”

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

People had end of life care plans in place which detailed their preferences and how they would like to be supported where they wished to discuss this. There was nobody receiving end of life care at the time of the assessment and we saw in documentation that people and their relatives did not always wish to discuss this in detail.