You are here

Hill House Nursing Home Good

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 11, 12 June 2014
Date of Publication: 15 July 2014
Inspection Report published 15 July 2014 PDF | 84.78 KB


Inspection carried out on 11, 12 June 2014

During a routine inspection

As part of our inspection we spoke with two people receiving care, two relatives, the acting manager and five staff working at the service. We also observed people receiving care and examined records at the service. Below is a summary of what we found.

Is the service safe?

People told us that they felt safe living at Hill House. One person said, �If I feel unwell [staff] will immediately get a doctor.� People�s personal files included a range of risk assessments and these included procedures to safely manage risks.

We found the service to be meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. People�s human rights were therefore properly recognised, respected and promoted.

People said they thought that staff were recruited safely. One person spoke positively about the �phasing in� of new staff. We read documents that showed appropriate checks being undertaken before staff began work.

Is the service effective?

People told us that staff encouraged them to be as independent as possible. One person said, �[Staff are aware of] my preference to get myself in and out of bed myself.�

People were involved in planning their care. One person told us, �I�ve been to [care review] meetings and I�ve read and signed [the care plan].� Staff also confirmed this involvement and one staff member told us, �Families are given a �My Life Story� pack to complete [on behalf of their relative].�

Half of the staff group had not completed a course in First Aid. This meant that staff may not all be able to appropriately respond to injuries suffered by people who use the service. We have asked the provider to tell what they are going to do to meet the requirements of the law in relation to ensuring staff receive training appropriate to their role.

Is the service caring?

People�s privacy and dignity were respected. One person told us, �[Staff] knock on my door and usually wait until I answer.

People told us that staff respected their personal preferences and interests and thought that their needs were being met. Staff confirmed this and one member of staff told us that, �One person likes to draw. We ensure their pencils are sharp.�

Is the service responsive?

People told us they felt listened to by staff and there were meetings for the people who use the service. Staff told us they felt listened to by management. One staff member said that improvements to activities equipment had followed recommendations made by staff.

We heard �old time� music being played in one lounge area that clearly reflected people�s preferences: we saw people smiling and moving to the music.

Is the service well-led?

Staff described a sound set of values upon which the service was based. These included meeting people�s holistic needs, involving people in decision making and valuing staff.

The service had a quality assurance system which identified, assessed and managed risks to people�s health, safety and welfare.