Hillbeck Residential Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (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 did not always make sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they did not always work in partnership with people, to decide how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People were not always supported to by care which was person centred. Some practices observed did not reflect person centred care and inclusive care such as segregated mealtimes, or use of the communal areas for multiple different activities at the same time..

However, people and relative fed back that there was a wide range of activities during the week which were tailored to people’s abilities, wishes and preferences. This included supporting people to spent time outside or going on external activities such as bowling or to the local garden centre. One relative told us, “I have seen people sat with their feet in a paddling pool outside and umbrellas up. My relative likes activities, she involves herself, there’s a lot more than any other place, and a good Monday – Friday programme,” Another relative told us, “The activities are really good. We knew my relative was declining mentally and physically, it ticked all the boxes in terms of activities and encouraging them to stay engaged.”

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

There was a stable staffing team who were knowledgeable about people’s diverse needs and trained to provide a high level of support. People’s outcomes were closely monitored to ensure the care they received was consistent, and that if people had preferences such as for personal care to be performed only by staff of a certain gender this was respected.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

Where people may struggle to communicate verbally, there was clear guidance setting out how staff could recognise through other means such as body language or facial expressions what they were trying to communicate. Staff were knowledgeable about this, and we observed patient interactions taking place in such circumstances. There was also information available in accessible and dementia friendly formats such as guidance on how to make a complaint, and around activity schedules and daily menus.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The new management had introduced regular ‘relative forums’ to allow them to be kept up to date on what was happening in the home and to raise any suggestions. Relatives told us they were pleased with this development and felt there was better communication and sharing of information. One relative explained, “When the registered manager took over, she started monthly meetings with families and would email us with a date, there was an agenda and she asked for family input, invited suggestions, it’s an open forum. I have been to one, I do get the minutes and know the door is always open.” There was also a meeting open to people who lived at Hillbeck to give them a chance to discuss things such as activities, food and their experience of staff. There were surveys for people, relatives and stakeholders to continually get feedback and identify areas for improvement.

Relatives told us they were communicated with openly including if their loved one’s health needs changed or there had been an accident to keep them updated and involved.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

People could access the care they needed, when they need it. There were regular visits from health professionals including GP’s, community dentists, opticians and chiropodists. For example, one person had deteriorating eyesight, and their relative explained how the home had worked with a local optician to visit them at Hillbeck to review this.

There was a wide range of activities which were tailored to people’s differing abilities. Staff explained that to ensure everybody has a chance to go out, when there were trips into the community, they would try to alternate this so different people could get the benefit of these.

There was a positive culture where staff were empowered to promote equity around sexuality and relationships, including how they would support people to explore these if they so wished. Leaders had recently undertaken focused work and competency assessments of staff in this area.

Staff and leaders did not always actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes. This meant people’s care was not always tailored in response to this.

People did not always have equity in experience, as some practices in place did not promote equity of choice or participation for people with differing or more complex needs. For example, having segregated mealtimes did not allow peers with different nutritional needs to eat together. Having all activities taking place together in a small area meant those who may become distressed in loud environments did not always have choices or quieter spaces. However, we heard positive example about the improved outcomes that some people had achieved through living at Hillbeck. One person had previously only been able to move around with assistance but were now able to do so themselves which gave them greater independence. Another person had previously been significantly underweight and had not engaged in activities but was now a healthy weight and frequently took part in activities organised by staff.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

There were systems in place to support people to plan for the future, including making decisions about the care they wished to receive should their health deteriorate. People were supported to make person-centred end of life care plans including setting out where they wanted to be if their health worsened, and any spiritual or religious needs that were important to be respected.