Archived: Hillcrest - Vernon

We spoke with six members of staff and the manager. Staff told us that it was a good place to work and that they felt people received good support. One said, 'It's a really fun job'. Another told us, 'It's rewarding'.

While we did not meet any relatives on the day of our visit, comments from relatives gathered as part of the home's satisfaction survey were overwhelmingly positive. These included, 'The general care of clients is outstanding' and, 'X has come alive and seems totally happy since they transferred to Hillcrest'.

We also gathered evidence of people's experiences of the service by observing how people were supported by staff and by looking at records. We found that people's care needs were being managed safely by the service and that staff had a good understanding of their roles and responsibilities.

We found that the support people received was individualised to their needs. People's rights with regard to consent were being promoted by the service and staff understood how people's capacity should be considered. People were supported to eat a varied diet which took account of their preferences. People told us that they could approach the staff and manager if they were unhappy or had ideas to discuss.

People we spoke with told us that they liked living at the home and staff helped them with their needs and interests. A person's relative told us "we are pleased they are at home here and enjoy being here, they are well cared for - as we would wish it". We found that people's individual needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered safely.

We found that people were protected by staff who understood abuse and how to report concerns. We saw that action was taken to protect people by following proper procedures and in consultation with the appropriate authority. People were supported by a skilled and qualified staff team who provided a consistency of care.

We found that the provider identified, assessed and managed risks to people's safety and welfare. However, we found the provider did not have systems in place to regularly seek the views on the quality of service that people who used the service, those acting on their behalf and staff experienced.