Hilton Park Care Centre

Updated 24 March 2021

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are looking at the preparedness of care homes in relation to infection prevention and control. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place.

This inspection took place on 19 February 2021 and was announced.

Updated 24 March 2021

This inspection took place on 9 October 2018. It was unannounced. Hilton Park Care Centre is a care home for up to 93 people, some of whom may be living with dementia. It is a two storey purpose built property. There were 87 people living at the home at the time of this visit.

Hilton Park Care Centre is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

There was a registered manager at the home. 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.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

Staff knew how to keep people safe, how to respond to possible harm and how to reduce risks to people. There were enough staff who had been recruited properly to make sure they were suitable to work with people. Medicines were stored and administered safely. Regular cleaning made sure that infection control was maintained. Lessons were learnt about accidents and incidents and these were shared with staff members to ensure changes were made to staff practise, to reduce further occurrences.

People’s care was planned and delivered in line with good practice guidance. People were cared for by staff who had received the appropriate training and had the skills and support to carry out their roles. People received a choice of meals, which they liked, and staff supported them to eat and drink. They were referred to health care professionals as needed and staff followed the advice professionals gave them. Adaptations were made to ensure people were safe and able to move around their home as independently as possible. Staff understood and complied with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. Staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the home supported this practice.

Staff were caring, kind and treated people with respect. People were listened to and were involved in their care and what they did on a day to day basis. People’s right to privacy was maintained by the actions and care given by staff members.

People’s personal and health care needs were met and care records provided staff with clear, detailed guidance in how to do this. People were able to take part in social events and spend time with their peers. A complaints system was in place and there was information so people knew who to speak with if they had concerns. Staff had guidance about caring for people at the end of their lives and information was available to show how each person wanted this.

Staff were supported by the registered manager, who had identified areas for improvement and developed a plan to address these. The provider’s monitoring process looked at systems throughout the service, identified issues and staff took the appropriate action to resolve these. People’s, relatives and staff views were sought, with positive results.

Further information is in the detailed findings below