CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Hillcrest & Lyndale Care & Support Services
1 Hill Close
1 Hill Close, Pontefract, WF8 2SF
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the service was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors found poor cleanliness, unsafe storage of some medicines, no fire extinguishers, uncovered hot radiators and unclear staffing records. Medicines administration records and recruitment checks were otherwise completed appropriately.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness and respect. Staff supported people's choices, privacy, dignity, independence and involvement in daily activities.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not inspected during this focused inspection. Its previous rating was carried forward when calculating the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- The home's checks and audits did not identify important problems with cleanliness, risk management or staff deployment. Inspectors also found that managers did not always use respectful terminology.
What inspectors found, December 2023
1 Hill Close was rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found caring support but important safety and management weaknesses.
This was an unannounced focused inspection. Inspectors visited on 24 October 2023 and gathered further information until 17 November 2023. They spoke with people, staff and managers, observed care, and checked care plans, risk records, staff files, audits and other records.
People were treated kindly and supported to make choices about their daily lives. Inspectors saw positive relationships, community activities and support that respected people's privacy, dignity and independence.
However, the home was not always clean, some risks were not properly assessed or managed, and staffing records did not clearly show how staff were deployed across the linked homes. Quality checks had not found these problems. The provider acted quickly after the inspection findings were raised.
The overall rating changed from Good at the previous inspection to Requires Improvement. Safe and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement, while Caring remained Good. Effective and Responsive were not inspected in this focused inspection, so their previous ratings were used when calculating the overall rating.
Kind relationships
People appeared relaxed with staff and said they were happy living at the home. Staff knew people well and supported them in a caring way.
“People's positive, relaxed body language and affectionate response to staff showed they enjoyed staff's company and were relaxed in their home.” from the report
Choice and independence
People chose activities, went out into the community and had control over where they spent their time. They were supported to take part in household tasks and personal interests.
“People were encouraged to exercise choice and control in their daily lives.” from the report
Safe medicines administration
Inspectors found that staff administered medicines appropriately and that records and audits were completed correctly. The main medicine concern was storage, which is included under safety risks.
“Medicine administration records were completed correctly and outcomes of audits and spot checks were recorded.” from the report
Safe recruitment
The provider carried out the required pre-employment checks described in the report, including checks of criminal records and references.
“The provider operated safe recruitment processes and undertook appropriate pre-employment checks on staff including Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks and reviewing references.” from the report
Cleanliness and infection control
seriousInspectors found dried excrement on surfaces and dirty kitchen equipment. Food temperature checks and opening-date records were not consistently completed, and there were no hand-drying facilities in some areas.
“We saw dried excrement on various surfaces upstairs. The kitchen cupboards, fridge, freezer and oven were dirty.” from the report
Unmanaged safety risks
seriousA skin cream and other medicines were stored in a cabinet next to a scorched oven housing. The home had no fire extinguishers, and hot radiators were not covered or risk-assessed for people's needs.
“The cabinet was positioned, pushed up against the oven housing. The veneer on both the cabinet and the oven housing were visibly scorched.” from the report
Unclear staffing deployment
needs fixingWhen inspectors arrived, no staff were present at the home. Records did not clearly show how two night staff were shared across the three homes, so inspectors recommended that staffing records be reviewed.
“Rotas and dependency tools showed that no night staff were provided at 1 Hill Close.” from the report
Weak management checks
seriousThe home's audits had not identified the problems with cleanliness, risk management and staffing records. This led to a breach of the governance regulation.
“The provider's systems did not always effectively monitor the quality of care provided to drive improvements.” from the report
Respectful language
needs fixingInspectors found that management did not always use respectful or empowering terminology when referring to people. They recommended reviewing best practice and changing this.
“The registered manager did not always use respectful terminology when referring to people who used the service and did not set a good example for staff.” from the report
- 01What has been done to remove the cleanliness and infection control problems found during the inspection?
- 02Where are medicines and skin creams now stored, and how is their storage temperature checked?
- 03Have fire extinguishers been provided and have the risks from hot, uncovered radiators been assessed?
- 04How are staffing levels and night cover recorded across the three linked homes now?
- 05What checks now make sure these problems are identified promptly by management?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Caring and Well-led; Effective and Responsive were not inspected, and their previous ratings were used to calculate the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 December 2023 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of 1 Hill Close
3 rated inspections over 9 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- December 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodCaring: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 April 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission. A service can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections, not every contact the CQC has had with the service.
Or stay at home with a private carer
Many people who look at care homes end up staying at home with a carer who comes in for a few hours a day, or lives in. PrimeCarers introduces you to self-employed carers you choose yourself: interviewed, ID and DBS checked, from about £20 an hour or £1,120 a week live-in.
Other services run by Hillcrest & Lyndale Care & Support Services Limited
3 other services on the CQC register. A pattern across a group tells you more than one report.