• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Hillside

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

1-2 Hillside House, Cotham, Bristol, BS6 6JP (0117) 973 5784

Provided and run by:
Milestones Trust

All Inspections

11 May 2017

During a routine inspection

The inspection took place on 11 and 12 May 2017. The inspection was unannounced.

The service provides care and accommodation for up to 16 people with a learning disability. At the time of our inspection there were 12 people living in the home.

There was a manager in post and they were going to begin the process of registering. The manager who was registered for the service with the Care Quality Commission, had left the service but their application to deregister had not been received. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are registered persons. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

There were some shortfalls found during our inspection. However, the manager had already identified most of the concerns we found and incorporated them in to an action plan. A number of records we found required updating to ensure they reflected people’s current needs and preferences. This included care plans and ‘essential lifestyle plans’ that identified goals that people were working towards. The manager had begun updating records; initially concentrating on health action plans, but other records were also identified as a high priority to address.

There was evidence that staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff were able to describe to us important aspects of the Act such as the assuming people had capacity unless it was assessed otherwise. There was also evidence of best interests decision making for those people who had been assessed as lacking capacity. We did find one example of a decision that had been made without a capacity assessment or best interest decision in place. Five people in the home had Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards in place. Some of those people had conditions on their authorisation but it was not clear that these conditions had consistently been met. We also found that notifications about these authorisations had not been made to the Care Quality Commission as required by law.

People in the home were supported by a caring group of staff who understood the needs of the people they supported. Staff supported their communication with sign and gestures and this ensured that people received reassurance when they sought it. During our inspection, we observed many positive interactions between staff and people in the home and people were settled and content in the presence of staff. There were sufficient number of staff on duty and numbers had recently adapted in recognition of the increased needs of people in the home.

People were able to go out in the local community independently if it had been assessed as safe to do so. Those people requiring support outside of the home also had opportunity to go out, for example to local shops. There were activities available in the home for people to access if they wished to, such as a pool table and arts and crafts.

People received safe support with their medicines. These were stored and administered safely.

24 March 2015

During a routine inspection

The inspection took place on 24 March 2015 and was unannounced. At our last inspection in June 2013 the service was meeting the requirements of the regulations.

Hillside provides accommodation and personal care for up to 16 adults who have a learning disability. On the day of our visit there were 14 people living at the home.

There was a registered manager for the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People said that they felt safe in the home and with the staff who worked there. There was enough staff to meet people’s range of needs.

Staff followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 for people who lacked capacity to make a decision. The registered manager had made seven applications under Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards for people whose liberty may have been restricted To keep them safe.

People told us that they were involved in planning and deciding how they wanted to be cared for. When people were not able to make their views known the staff asked relatives to help them to understand the individual’s needs and wishes.

People’s needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered in a consistent way. Staff knew how to ensure people’s individual care needs were met.

People were supported to eat and drink enough so that their nutrition and hydration needs were met.

People had individual care plans that set out the support they needed and how they wanted this to be provided. Each person’s needs had been identified and support was provided as explained in their care plans. This meant people received support in the way they wanted.

The staff on duty understood the needs of people they were supporting. They encouraged people to make choices about their care and their lives. People were encouraged to maintain their independence and have control over their daily lives.

People told us they were treated kindly by the staff at the home. The staff engaged with people in a caring and attentive manner.

The registered manager ensured that complaints were investigated and responded to according to the provider’s complaints procedure. The people we spoke with knew how to make a complaint or raise a concern. People who were not able to make their views known were supported to have them heard and properly represented.

There was a system in place to assess the quality of the service. However, this system was not being kept up to date. Audits and checks on the care and service were not always carried out as regularly as the provider’s own policy required. This meant there were risks that people could receive unsafe and unsuitable care.

17 June 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with nine people who used the service to find out it was like living at Hillside House. We asked people what they thought of the staff who assisted them at the home.

Every person we met had positive views of life at the home and the quality of care and support they were receiving. One person told us, 'the staff are nice'. Examples of the comments people made included, 'the staff help me get up and take me out when I want to go shopping' Another person told us "my keyworker helps me and I can talk to them about anything ".

People who used the service were being supported and encouraged to live an independent life in the home and the community.

People were proved with a varied and nutritious diet. Menus were planned based on peoples' likes and dislikes and with their full involvement.

People felt safe living at Hillside House. There were systems in place to safeguard people from the risks of abuse.

The provider's recruitment procedures ensured that safe and suitable staff were employed at the home to assist people.

The overall quality of service and its suitability was being effectively checked and monitored. Action was taken where needed to improve the overall quality of service that people were receiving.

19 June 2012

During a routine inspection

We visited the home on 19 June 2012. We spoke with eight people who lived at the home. All of the people we spoke with said they enjoyed living at the home and they liked the staff. People living at the home told us they were involved in their care and support.

People told us that they were given 'easy read' information, to help them understand about their care and support provided by the home.

People told us there was enough staff working at the home. One person said 'there is always someone around if you want to go out.'

Staff we spoke with told us that they were well supported in their roles and received appropriate training.

5 January 2012

During a routine inspection

People told us they liked living at the home when we asked about their experiences of living at Hillside and about the staff. These individuals told us they were able to make decisions and the staff supported them with becoming more independent, for example, staff helped them with cooking, self medicating and maintaining links and relationships with relatives.

We were told that there was a care file kept about them in the office. They said they could look in their files whenever they wanted and staff discussed their needs with them.

People said they had a key worker (a member of staff appointed to liaise with the person and their relatives). They said that their key workers would spend time with them, went on shopping trips and supported them with independent living skills, such as cooking.

They told us that during the day they went to day care centres, attended college courses and that they were part of the community. Two individuals told us they were independent outside the home which meant that they could leave the home without staff supervision. We were also told that they could travel on busses independently.

We asked people about the way staff respected their rights. We were told that staff knocked on their bedroom doors before entering, they had a key to their bedrooms and there were no rules about times to rise or retire.

It was stated that the staff were good and they knew how to meet their needs. People said they felt safe from abuse and would approach staff with complaints.

Refreshments making facilities were made more accessible for people and they were able to make their drinks whenever they wanted.