Hillside Care Centre
Hereford, HR2
ResidentialDementia
Not yet ratedcare home
CQC report explained · a residential care home, run by Hoople
Southbank
4 Southbank Close, Hereford, HR1 2TQ
Requires improvementpublished 25 October 2023, 2 years ago
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the service was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
The five questions inspectors ask
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- The home was no longer in breach of the safe care and treatment regulation, and improvements had been made to medicines, food storage and safety checks. However, fluid records and other care records were not always clear or complete, and some furniture was damaged or difficult to clean.
- Effective?
- Requires improvement
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward.
- Caring?
- Requires improvement
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward.
- Responsive?
- Requires improvement
- This question was not inspected during this visit. Its previous rating was carried forward.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Management and governance systems were still not strong enough. Improvements were not always given clear deadlines or named owners, and Regulation 17 remained breached.
The latest report, explained
What inspectors found, October 2023
Southbank rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found improvements in medicines and staffing, but records, premises and management systems still needed work.
This was an unannounced focused inspection. Two inspectors spoke with people, staff and visiting professionals. They reviewed care and medicine records and documents about how the home was managed.
The home had improved its medicine arrangements, food storage, safety checks and communication with health professionals. Staff knew people well, responded quickly and there were enough staff on duty. People said they felt safe and received their medicines as prescribed.
However, care records were difficult to follow, sometimes out of date and not always completed. The building and furniture were old and worn. Management checks did not always include clear deadlines or named people responsible for completing improvements. The home remained in breach of Regulation 17 for good governance.
The overall rating stayed Requires Improvement. This means the inspectors found some improvements, but there was not enough assurance that the home was consistently safe and well managed. The Safe and Well-led ratings were assessed at this inspection, while the other ratings were carried over from the previous inspection.
What inspectors praised
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs and saw staff respond quickly when people needed help.
“There were enough staff on duty to meet people's needs and keep them safe.” from the report
Safer medicines
Medicine arrangements had improved. Staff were trained, followed safe administration practices and checked whether people needed prescribed medicines when required.
“People received their medicines in line with their prescription by staff who were trained to do so.” from the report
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff understood safeguarding procedures and acted when concerns were raised.
“People told us they felt safe by the staff who supported them.” from the report
Improved communication
Visiting professionals said communication and staff knowledge of people's needs had improved since the previous inspection.
“Those we spoke with felt communication and staff's knowledge of people's needs had improved.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
Care records were incomplete
needs fixingRecords were not always tailored to the individual, could contain out-of-date information and were sometimes hard to navigate. Daily records were not always completed, making it harder to confirm that risks and needs were being managed consistently.
“People's care records remained difficult to navigate, were not always individual to the person, held out of date information and daily records were not always completed.” from the report
Weak management oversight
seriousThe provider's checks identified problems, but actions did not always have clear deadlines or named people responsible. Some improvements remained incomplete for months.
“Without clear timescales and accountabilities, actions remained incomplete for months.” from the report
Worn building and furniture
needs fixingSome furniture was damaged, stained or difficult to clean. Fixtures and parts of the building needed replacement, and one person could not access the garden from their bungalow because of a step.
“The furniture and fixtures of the building were old and worn.” from the report
Unclear fluid monitoring
needs fixingSome records showed days when people had not drunk enough, but it was unclear whether records were incomplete or people had genuinely not had enough to drink.
“It was not clear if records were incomplete or the person had not drunk sufficiently.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
- 01Which care records for my relative are out of date or difficult to follow, and when will they be corrected?
- 02How will you make sure daily records and fluid monitoring records are completed accurately every day?
- 03What is the timetable for replacing the damaged furniture and improving the building, including access to the garden?
- 04Who is responsible for each outstanding improvement, and how will you show that it has been completed?
- 05How will the change of manager affect the action plan and the oversight of care?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 October 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.
The story over the years
Every inspection of Southbank
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has held its Requires improvement rating throughout.
- October 2023Requires improvementcurrent ratingstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2023Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2022
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 April 2022.
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.
Another option
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.
Same provider
Other services run by Hoople Ltd
2 other services on the CQC register. A pattern across a group tells you more than one report.
Not yet rated
Ridgemoor Road
Leominster, HR6
Residential
Rated 5 months agocare home
Nearby
Other care homes near Hereford
Lyndale
Hereford, HR1 · 0.0 km
ResidentialDementia
Rated 6 years agocare home
Oaklands Nursing Home
Hereford, HR1 · 0.4 km
NursingDementia
Rated 6 years agocare home
Noble Manor
Hereford, HR1 · 0.5 km
Residential
Not yet ratedcare home
Eastbank
Hereford, HR1 · 0.6 km
ResidentialDementia
Rated 7 years agocare home
National Star at Ledbury Road
Hereford, HR1 · 0.7 km
Nursing
Rated 4 years agocare home
Newstead House
Hereford, HR1 · 0.9 km
NursingDementia
Rated 7 years agocare home