Hillsborough Residential Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good.At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.
 

This service scored 67 (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 not always made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by regularly assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

People’s needs were assessed before they went to live at Hillsborough or after a hospital admission if their needs had changed. This allowed the manager to make an informed decision as to whether they were able to meet the person’s needs.
Care plans had not always been updated in a timely manner when people’s needs had changed. We discussed this with managers who told us they were aware there were shortfalls and were auditing care plans to identify where improvements were needed. They were planning to introduce a ‘resident of the day’ system where one resident is highlighted daily to receive personalised attention including a comprehensive review of their care plan. This would help ensure all care plans were reviewed on a monthly basis.

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

People were supported to eat a balanced diet which supported their well-being. The chef told us they were passionate about nutrition and ensured meals included fresh seasonal produce. They were knowledgeable about people’s dietary requirements. Feedback about meals was mixed. One person commented, “There are too many pies, sometimes four or five times a week.” However, another person told us, “There’s nothing at all that I don’t like. I eat what they give me, and I’ve never been given anything I wouldn’t eat.”
People’s food and fluid intake was monitored. However, the information relating to food intake was not sufficiently detailed to enable managers to have a good overview of what people had eaten. The manager told us they had identified this as an area for improvement and would be making changes to how this was recorded.
 

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

Staff shared information effectively to support consistent care delivery. Handover meetings took place every morning between shifts. An additional meeting was held mid-morning to review people’s needs, ensuring important updates were communicated to all staff members.
Staff told us they communicated well together and were kept up to date with any changes. Handover notes and regular staff meetings meant information was shared across the staff team.
 

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

People were encouraged to remain mobile. An activity co-ordinator had recently joined the staff team and told us they were planning to introduce more activities, including some gentle exercise sessions. These are important to help people maintain their mobility and strength.
 

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

There were systems and processes to monitor people’s health and emotional well-being. For example, when people showed signs of becoming unwell staff completed additional checks. Any concerns were escalated to the relevant professionals.
One person sometimes behaved in a way which could put themselves, and others, at risk. Staff recorded when the person became distressed so any themes could be identified. However, we were unable to view these records due to an issue with the electronic recording system. The deputy manager told us they would reload the information to make it easy to access for staff and managers.
 

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.

People were asked if they consented to care before personal care was provided. Care plans showed people who were able to, had consented to their plan of care.