Archived: Hollybush Residential Home

Updated 17 August 2015

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.

We visited Hollybush on 2 and 3 June 2015. The inspection was carried out by one inspector. The inspection was unannounced

Before visiting the home we reviewed previous inspection reports, the information we held about the home and notifications of incidents. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.

During the two days we spoke with eleven people who used the service and three visiting relatives. We also spoke with the provider and four members of staff. We inspected the premises and observed care practices on both days of our visit. We looked at three records which related to people’s individual care. We also looked at five staff files and other records in relation to the running of the home.

Updated 17 August 2015

Hollybush is a care home which provides accommodation and personal care for up to 14 people. At the time of the inspection 14 people were using the service. Some of those people were living with dementia. Some people had physical or sensory disabilities.

There was a registered manager at the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. 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 inspected Hollybush on 2 and 3 June 2015. The inspection was unannounced. The service was last inspected the service in February 2014 and was found to be meeting the requirements of the regulations.

People told us they felt safe at the service and with the staff who supported them. People told us, “Yes I feel safe, the staff are good, they are polite and friendly,” “It is very good indeed,” and “Oh, it is excellent, I am very happy, well fed, it couldn’t be better….they look after me well.” A relative told us; “We are very happy, the staff communicate with us very well. There are no problems.” Staff were confident, and had been suitably trained, about how to recognise potential signs of abuse and the subsequent action they would take. Staff received other suitable training to carry out their roles. Recruitment processes were satisfactory and appropriate pre-employment checks had been completed to help ensure people’s safety.

The medication system was well organised, and people told us they received their medication in a timely manner. People had access to a general practitioner, and other medical professionals such as a dentist, chiropodist and an optician. However records of some medical support were not always consistently kept to a good standard.

There were satisfactory numbers of staff on duty to keep people safe and meet their needs. People who used the service, and staff who worked at the home, said there were enough staff provided. For example people who used the service said if they pressed the call bell staff responded to them in a timely manner.

People who used the service told us staff were caring, worked in a respectful manner and did not rush them. People said they could spend their time how they wanted, were provided with a range of choices, and were able to spend time in private if they wished. Some activities were available for people.

Care files mostly contained suitable information such as a care plan, and these were regularly reviewed. However we were concerned that people’s capacity to consent to care and treatment was not always suitably assessed in line with legislation and guidance. For example there was limited evidence of systems in place to assess people’s mental capacity in line with the Mental Capacity Act (2005) , and make appropriate referrals to the local authority should this be necessary.

People said they enjoyed the food, and we were told regular drinks were provided. People had a choice of eating their meals in the dining room or their bedrooms.

Nobody who we met raised any concerns about their care. Everyone we spoke to said if they did have concerns, they would feel confident discussing these with staff or with management. People said they were sure that staff and management would resolve any concerns or complaints appropriately.

People felt the home was well managed. For example we were told “the manager always ensures the home is nice, clean and well maintained”. There were satisfactory systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.

We found a Breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2010. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.