• Care Home
  • Care home

Hillbeck Residential Care Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Roundwell, Bearsted, Maidstone, Kent, ME14 4HN (01622) 737847

Provided and run by:
Charing Hill Limited

All Inspections

27 February 2019

During an inspection looking at part of the service

About the service:

Hillbeck is a residential care home that was providing personal care to 49 older people, some who were living with dementia, at the time of the inspection.

People’s experience of using this service:

• People told us they felt safe at Hillbeck. They knew who to report any concerns to and were happy with the support they received from staff. One person told us, “If I need to complain there wouldn’t be any problem with that.”

• People's care records contained guidance for staff about how to support people safely and minimise risks to people. Staff were trained in their responsibilities for safeguarding adults and knew what action to take if they witnessed or suspected any abuse.

• People felt safe and received support to take their medicines safely. One person told us, “"My medicine is all brought to me at the same time each day."

• There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs and recruitment processes and procedures were robust.

• Risks to people's well-being and safety were assessed, recorded and kept up to date. Staff supported people to manage these risks effectively. One person told us, “I have a frame to help my mobility, and I am managing it with the help of the careers.”

• Staff were competent, knowledgeable and skilled. They received regular training, supervisions and appraisals which supported them to conduct their roles effectively. One person told us, “The staff get on well and they are good at what they do.”

• Staff and people said the manager was approachable and listened. One person told us, “The manager is very nice and approachable, you can tell her anything.”

• The provider's quality assurance processes were effective and resulted in improvements to the service.

Rating at last inspection:

At the last comprehensive inspection the service was rated Good (27 September 2017).

Why we inspected:

This was a focused inspection. We had received a high number of notifications from the provider and concerns in relation to the way people were supported. We undertook a focused inspection to check whether people were receiving consistently safe care We looked at our domains 'safe' and 'well led'. This report only covers our findings in relation to these topics.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service.

For more details, please read the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk.

15 August 2017

During a routine inspection

This inspection was carried out on 15 August 2017, and was an unannounced inspection.

Hillbeck Residential Care Home provides care and support for up to 60 older people some of who may be living with dementia. The property has two floors, with a lift. There is 53 single room and three double rooms. Most bedrooms have en suite facilities and bathrooms with assisted baths are available. A garden is available for people who use the service. The provider organisation is a company that has other services across the South and East of England. At the time of our inspection, 47 people were living or staying at the service.

At the last Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspection on 29 September 2015, the service was rated Good in all domains and overall.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

The service had a registered manager in place who had worked at the service for six months prior to our inspection. 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 felt safe with the staff that supported them. The safety of people using the service continued to be taken seriously by the management team and staff who understood their responsibility to protect people’s health and well-being. Staff and the management team had received training about protecting people from abuse, and they knew what action to take if they suspected abuse.

Risks to people’s safety had been assessed and measures put into place to manage any hazards identified. Staff followed appropriate guidance to minimise identified risks to people’s health, safety and welfare. The premises were maintained and checked to help ensure people’s safety. Medicines were managed safely and people received them as prescribed.

There were enough staff on duty with the right skills to meet people’s needs. Staff had been trained to meet people’s needs including their specialist needs. Recruitment practices were safe and checks were carried out to make sure staff were suitable to work with people who needed care and support.

People’s needs had been assessed to identify the care and support they required. Care and support was planned with people and their relatives and regularly reviewed to ensure people continued to have the support they needed. People were treated with dignity and respect by staff who also maintained people’s privacy. People participated in a wide range of activities of their choice within the service and the local community. People were actively encouraged to maintain and increase their independence.

People and their relative’s spoke highly of the staff and management team. Staff had a full understanding of people’s care and support needs and had the skills and knowledge to meet them. People received consistent support from the same members of staff who knew them well. People were supported to be fully involved in the care and support they received and, decisions relating to their lives.

People spoke positively about the food they received. People had access to the food that they enjoyed and were able to access drinks and snacks throughout the day. People’s nutrition and hydration needs had been assessed and recorded. Staff met people’s specific dietary needs. Staff ensured people remained as healthy as possible with support from health care professionals, if required.

The management team were committed to providing a high quality service to people and its continuous development. People and/or their relatives were involved in the running of the service and were continually asked for their views, ideas and suggestions. Processes were in place to monitor the quality of the service being provided to people.

The Care Quality Commission is required by law to monitor the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. The management team and staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

The provider ensured the complaints procedure was made available in an accessible format if people wished to make a complaint. Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service being provided to people.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

13 August 2015.

During a routine inspection

The inspection was carried out on 13 August 2015 and was unannounced.

The service provided accommodation and personal care for older people some of whom may be living with dementia. The accommodation was provided over two floors. A lift was available to take people between floors. There were 37 people living in the service when we inspected.

There was a registered manager employed at 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.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care services. Restrictions imposed on people were only considered after their ability to make individual decisions had been assessed as required under the Mental Capacity Act (2005) Code of Practice. The registered manager understood when an application should be made. Decisions people made about their care or medical treatment were dealt with lawfully and fully recorded.

People felt safe and staff understood their responsibilities to protect people living with dementia. Staff had received training about protecting people from abuse. The management team had access to and understood the safeguarding policies of the local authority and followed the safeguarding processes.

The registered manager and care staff used their experience and knowledge of people’s needs to assess how they planned people’s care to maintain their safety, health and wellbeing. Risks were assessed and management plans implemented by staff to protect people from harm.

There were policies and a procedure in place for the safe administration of medicines. Staff followed these policies and had been trained to administer medicines safely.

People had access to GPs and their health and wellbeing was supported by prompt referrals and access to medical care if they became unwell.

People and their relatives described a service that was welcoming and friendly. Staff provided friendly compassionate care and support. People were encouraged to get involved in how their care was planned and delivered.

Staff upheld people’s right to choose who was involved in their care and people’s right to do things for themselves was respected.

The registered manager involved people in planning their care by assessing their needs when they first moved in and then by asking people if they were happy with the care they received. Staff knew people well and people had been asked about who they were and about their life experiences. This helped staff deliver care to people as individuals.

Incidents and accidents were recorded and checked by the registered manager to see what steps could be taken to prevent these happening again. The risk in the service was assessed and the steps to be taken to minimise them were understood by staff.

Managers ensured that they had planned for foreseeable emergencies, so that should they happen people’s care needs would continue to be met. The premises and equipment in the service were well maintained.

Recruitment policies were in place. Safe recruitment practices had been followed before staff started working at the service. The registered manager ensured that they employed enough staff to meet people’s assessed needs. Staffing levels were kept under constant review as people’s needs changed.

Staff understood the challenges people faced and supported people to maintain their health by ensuring people had enough to eat and drink.

If people complained they were listened to and the registered manager made changes or suggested solutions that people were happy with. The actions taken were fed back to people.

People felt that the service was well led. They told us that managers were approachable and listened to their views. The registered manager of the service and other senior managers provided good leadership. The provider and registered manager developed business plans to improve the service. This was reflected in the positive feedback given about staff by the people who experienced care from them.

27 February 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

The inspection was conducted by two Compliance Inspectors over a period of five hours. We observed the care provided and spoke with the director of care and operations, the registered manager, four carers and the maintenance manager.

People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because reasonable steps had been taken to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

There were appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines safely and effectively.

We saw that the premises were designed to provide care in an environment that is suitable for its purpose and adequately maintained.

There was an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.

9 August 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with people who used the service and observed staff interactions with them. We found that people had their privacy and dignity protected and were supported to remain as independent as possible.

We saw that people received care and support in line with their needs. People told us that they were happy at the home.

People received the medicine they needed at the time they needed it. However medicine was not stored safely when delivered in to the home.

We looked around the home and found that maintenance was not always completed and that there were some odours around the home.

We looked at how the service monitored the quality of the care they provided. We saw that although there were some systems in place, action was not always taken where shortfalls were found.

We looked at care records for people who used the service. We saw that records reflected people's needs and were updated when necessary.

17, 22 January 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we spoke to people who used the service and their relatives. We also used observation tools to observe interactions between people and staff. We saw that there were some positive interactions. However staff did not always engage with people living in the home when they needed staff attention.

We spoke with staff about their working practices and how the service ran on a day to day basis. Staff told us that although they were busy, they felt that there were enough staff available to meet people's needs. We saw that the service employed a person who arranged activities for people who used the service. We observed that people enjoyed the activities available to them.

Wespoke to the homes GP and looked at care records for people. We saw that some care records were not accurate and did not reflect all of people's needs. A relative of a person told us 'Sometimes the staff do not follow what is in people's care plans'.

We viewed most areas of the home. We saw that not all areas of the home were in good repair and needed maintenance. We found that the some people's bedrooms contained hazards which could cause them to trip.

We looked at other records held by the home which included maintenance, staffing and medication records. We saw that some records were not completed accurately and did not contain all the information they needed to.

15 June 2011

During an inspection in response to concerns

We spoke with people who said they enjoyed their days at Hillbeck Residential Care Home. People told us they liked the activities co-ordinator and seemed to enjoy a good relationship with him.

People told us they felt safe at Hillbeck.