Our inspection took place over two days. On 9 November 2016 we made an unannounced visit. We also visited on 11 November 2016, but told the provider we would be coming. At our last inspection in December 2015 we rated the service as ‘Requires Improvement’. We found three breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activity) Regulations. The care was not sufficiently person-centred, medicines were not always managed safely and we found the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) processes were not always legally correct. The provider sent us an action plan after the inspection, which showed how improvements would be made. At this inspection we found the provider had followed their action plan and were no longer in breach of regulations.

Hillside House provides accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care, learning disabilities or mental health conditions, adults under 65. The home is situated in the Headingley area of Leeds and is close to local amenities. The home has a mix of small flats and bedrooms. There is a communal kitchen/diner and lounge area. There is a small car park to the rear of the home and a garden to the front.

At the time of our inspection there were seven people using the service, and there was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We found medicines were managed safely. Medicines were stored securely, records were fully completed and people told us they got their medicines when they were needed.

Staff had received training in safeguarding and understood when and how to report any concerns. People told us they felt safe using the service and we saw risks associated with people’s care, support and social activities were effectively documented.

Recruitment of staff was safe, and followed good practice in making background checks in order to ensure staff were not barred from working with vulnerable people. Staff were present in the service in sufficient numbers.

We saw the building was well maintained and service contracts were in place to ensure major fittings such as electrical systems were regularly checked. Staff had taken part in fire drills and were confident they would know what to do in the event of a fire.

Care plans contained decision specific assessments of people’s capacity, in line with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA). The provider had applied for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) where needed, and we saw plans in place to comply with any conditions attached to these.

We found staff received a thorough induction, and there was a rolling programme of training in place. Supervision meetings were held monthly and staff had an annual appraisal.

People received appropriate support with nutrition and hydration. We saw the provider had responded to one person’s elevated risk in this area, and staff were able to tell us how the person received appropriate support to minimise this risk. Staff told us how they promoted healthier eating options. We saw people were supported to access health and social care professionals when needed.

We saw people had a good relationship with staff, and staff told us ways in which they ensured people’s dignity, privacy and rights were respected. Key workers worked closely with people to help build a rapport, and supported people to contribute to their care plans.

We saw care plan information was available in different formats appropriate to the needs and preferences of people who used the service.

Care plans contained a large amount of detail specific to each person, showing how their care and support should be delivered according to their preferences.

People who used the servic

The inspection took place on 08 December 2015 and was unannounced and on 14 December 2015 which was announced. This was the services first inspection.

Hillside House is situated in the Headingley area of Leeds and is close to local amenities. The home has a mix of flats and bedrooms. There is a communal kitchen/diner and lounge area. There is a car park to the rear of the home and a garden to the front.

At the time of the inspection, the service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Staff had an understanding of safeguarding vulnerable adults; however, the registered manager had not reported two safeguarding incidents to the Care Quality Commission. There was a risk to people’s safety because medicines were not always managed consistently and safely.

Mental capacity assessments had not been completed and the service had made Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards applications inappropriately. People’s care plans contained sufficient and relevant information to provide consistent care and support. However, the care provided was not always person centred or inclusive and did not take into account people’s preferences.

We found people were cared for, or supported by, sufficient numbers of suitably qualified and experienced staff. Robust recruitment procedures were in place to make sure suitable staff worked with people who used the service and staff completed an induction when they started work. Staff received the training and support required to meet people’s needs.

There were opportunities for people to be involved in a range of activities within the home and/or or the local community. People had access to plenty of food and drinks. People received good support which ensured their health care needs were met. Staff were aware and knew how to respect people’s privacy and dignity.

The service did have good management and leadership. People had opportunity to comment on the quality of service and influence service delivery. Effective systems were in place which ensured people received safe quality care. Complaints were welcomed and were investigated and responded to appropriately.

You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.