You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 8 November 2017

Hillcrest is home for up to 20 adults with learning disabilities. On the day of our inspection there were 18 people using the service. There are also 2 smaller houses, 1 Hill Close and 2 Hill Close, which are registered separately but form part of one complex with many elements such as staffing and some management functions shared across all three buildings. We inspected these services on the same day as much of the evidence we needed to gather was common to all three. For this reason some parts of each report will be the same.

At our last inspection in February 2015 we rated Hillcrest ‘Good’, and did not identify any breaches of regulations. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated ‘Good’.

People told us they felt safe, mainly due to the staff being present. Risks associated with care and the environment in and around the home were well assessed.

Staff were recruited safely, and understood how to recognise and report any safeguarding concerns they had. There were enough staff on duty in the home.

People’s medicines were managed safely.

Staff had a thorough induction and had access to on-going training and support. The registered manager carried out checks to ensure training was effective.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. The provider asked for people’s consent to care and treatment. Some key information relating to this was in accessible formats.

People enjoyed their meals and were asked what they wanted to be on menus. We saw some innovation in the approach to nutrition which had a positive impact on people’s health. The provider supported people to access health and social care professionals when needed.

We saw relaxed and good natured interactions between people and staff. People had access to activities which reflected their interests. Staff understood how to respect people’s privacy and dignity.

There was person-centred information in people’s care plans. Accessible formats had been used effectively to enable people to write detailed plans for end of life care.

Staff told us they enjoyed working at the provider’s services within the complex and said they had a good relationship with the registered manager. They told us the registered manager was supportive and approachable.

The provider was monitoring quality in the service. People were consulted and the registered manager undertook regular audits to ensure areas for improvement were identified and addressed. We received good feedback about care standards from a visiting health professional we spoke with.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 8 November 2017

The service remains 'Good'.

Effective

Good

Updated 8 November 2017

The service remains 'Good'

Caring

Good

Updated 8 November 2017

We have rated the service as 'Good'.

People told us they had a good rapport with staff. Their choices were respected, and care plans were person-centred.

Responsive

Good

Updated 8 November 2017

The service remains 'Good'.

Well-led

Good

Updated 8 November 2017

The service remains 'Good'.