Archived: The Hollies

Updated 9 March 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This unannounced inspection took place on 13 February 2018. The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of service. Their area of expertise was in older people’s care.

We reviewed the Provider Information Record (PIR) and previous inspection reports before the inspection. The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and the improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed the information we held about the service and notifications of incidents we had received. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.

During the inspection we spoke with eight people and six visiting relatives. We also spoke with the registered manager, deputy manager and five care staff.

We looked at four people’s care plans and associated records, Medicine Administration Records (MAR), three staff recruitment files, staff duty rosters, staff training records and records relating to the running of the service.

Updated 9 March 2018

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of The Hollies on 13 February 2018. The Hollies is a ‘care home’ that provides care for a maximum of 20 adults. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. At the time of the inspection there were 18 people living at the service. The accommodation is spread over two floors. A shared lounge and dining room are on the ground floor. There are two sets of stairs to the second floor and one has a stair lift in place.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

On the day of the inspection there was a relaxed and friendly atmosphere at the service. People and staff welcomed us into the service and were happy talk to us about their views of living and working there. People told us they were happy with the care they received and believed it was a safe environment. Comments from people and visitors included, “Very homely, relaxed and happy atmosphere”, “Open approach to any issues raised” and “I’m very happy here, it was my choice to come.”

Many people living at the service had lived in the local area before moving into the service and most staff also lived locally. This meant the people and staff had shared knowledge and interests which had helped people to develop meaningful relationships with staff. We saw that staff interacted with people in a caring and compassionate manner. Comments from people included, “I’ve always lived in Roche and lots of the people who work here live in the village, so I know a lot of the carers here”, “I have no faults with anyone, they are all very good" and “My key worker is lovely, we have a joke.”

Staff supported people to keep in touch with family and friends. People told us, “Lots of friends from the village and family visit me; they can come whenever, it’s like having your own flat; I can Skype all my family in America, the carers set it all up for me each time” and “Family come to visit me; they come when they want, one comes to see me every day.” Relatives told us they were always made welcome and were able to visit at any time. One relative said, “No restrictions at all, we come a lot, around 3-4 times a week.”

People received care and support that was responsive to their needs because staff were aware of the needs of people who lived at The Hollies. Safe arrangements were in place for the storing and administration of medicines. Staff supported people to access healthcare services such as occupational therapists, GPs, chiropodists, district nurses, opticians and audiologists.

People were supported to eat a healthy and varied diet. Where people needed assistance with eating and drinking staff provided support appropriate to meet each individual person’s assessed needs. Comments from people about their meals included, “It’s good food”, “It’s pancake day today and we are going to have pancakes at teatime” and “I enjoy all the food and if you don’t like anything they’ll always get you something else.’

Care plans were well organised and contained personalised information about the individual person’s needs and wishes. Care planning was reviewed regularly and whenever people’s needs changed. People’s care plans gave direction and guidance for staff to follow to help ensure people received their care and support in the way they wanted.

People were able to take part in a range of group and individual activities. An activity coordinator was employed for two days a week and arranged regular events for people. These included baking, craft work, exercises and board games as well as external entertainers and religious services.

Management and staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Where people did not have the capacity to make certain decisions the service acted in accordance with legal requirements. Applications for DoLS authorisations had been made to the local authority appropriately.

There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff on duty to meet people’s needs in a timely manner. Staff knew how to recognise and report the signs of abuse. Staff were supported through a system of induction, training, supervision and staff meetings. This meant they developed the necessary skills to carry out their roles. There were opportunities for staff to raise any concerns or ideas about how the service could be developed.

Staff had a positive attitude and told us the management team provided strong leadership. Staff told us they felt supported by the management commenting, “I would be happy for a relative of mine to live here”, “We are a good team, we have low sickness levels because we don’t want to let our colleagues down”, “I love it here, wouldn’t want to work anywhere else” and “The owners are good to us.”

People and relatives all described the management of the home as open and approachable. Comments included, “Yes, I would definitely recommend the home, I chose here because it is central for my visitors”, “The owners sometimes come around and when they do they talk to everyone individually to see if we are all ok”, “I would recommend it here, they are very good” and “The managers are often around the home.”

People and their families were given information about how to complain. There were effective quality assurance systems in place to make sure that any areas for improvement were identified and addressed.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.