Hilltop Court Nursing 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

People were treated with equity. Inspectors observed people were supported in line with their protected characteristics. One family member told us, “They [care workers] treat residents with dignity. I have never had any cause for concern. My husband is on a unit which is all men and sometimes they can have altercations. The staff separated them very well, calmly.”

This service scored 54 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

People were satisfied with the care and support they received from staff. Relatives confirmed they felt confident to speak with staff or the manager about anything which worries them and felt it would be acted upon. One relative told us, “The manager has been firm but fair from what I have seen so far. Staff seem much more organised from what I have seen.”

During the inspection we did not encounter any concerns with people not being treated and supported in line with their protected characteristics.

The home had a service improvement plan in place, the ethos of this plan was to improve the experiences and support people received. Staff told us they were committed to this goal.

Not all staff had received training in relation to providing support for people reaching the end of their life. Following the inspection the provider assured us that all staff would receive E-learning training in relation to end of life care and was considering rolling out the Gold standard framework (GSF) at the home. The GSF is a accredited set of standard to provide people with good quality end of life care. The home manager said that where possible end of life care was discussed with people and families. However, there was no evidence that this had been embedded in practice from review of people’s records.

The provider had an end of life care policy and procedure, with clearly stated sections on how the home should proceed with regards to people’s end of life care. However we noted that the policy encouraged the service to use recognised pathways such as the GSF, which were not being used by the home.

Although no concerns were raised around end of life care, family members provided mixed responses about how they were involved in decision making and planning for people's care prior to them needing this type of support.