Holly House Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the service met people’s needs. At the last inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People experienced care which reflected who they were, what mattered to them, and how they wished to be supported. Staff demonstrated a strong ethos of dignity, empathy and individualised care, and people’s daily routines and preferences meaningfully shaped how support was delivered. People and their relatives told us that staff really knew people. Staff adapted their practices to meet each person’s needs. For example, one person was quite isolated, so the registered manager invited their relative to join them for lunch every week. The person told this made ‘an immense’ difference to them and they ‘loved the opportunity to spend time chatting’ as it was easier talking to their relative. Staff spoke warmly about people, including the small details that helped them feel known and valued, such as preferred clothing routines, daily habits, and how people liked to relax. Relatives consistently described staff as kind, caring and responsive, saying the team “knew [my relative] really well” and that people looked settled, comfortable and at ease within the home.

Staff understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity. People experienced coordinated care, and staff worked well with external professionals to ensure care remained responsive to people’s changing needs. People’s care records were detailed and person‑centred, supporting staff to understand and meet individual needs. Staff were proactive when people’s health changed, making timely referrals and ensuring professionals had accurate information. External partners, including GPs, therapists and dietitians, consistently told us the team worked collaboratively, communicated well and followed professional advice to maintain continuity. Relatives told us they were kept informed about changes in people’s health and care, and that staff responded quickly when concerns were raised. Staff described effective teamwork and said they felt equipped to provide consistent support. Professionals commented on the home’s openness to partnership working and their strong presence in multidisciplinary meetings.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. People received appropriate and accurate information tailored to their needs. Communication plans were in place. Staff understood individual communication preferences and used supportive conversations to build trust. Relatives told us they received regular updates about their family members and that they were contacted promptly when staff had concerns. They valued the informal communication from staff, such as explanations about how people had spent the day or what activities they had enjoyed. Families appreciated the photos and activity updates, which helped them feel connected to their relatives’ experiences.

The provider and management team enabled people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. They made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas. People told us they felt able to express their opinions and that staff took their preferences seriously, and they felt involved in care planning. They felt comfortable discussing any aspects of the running of the service with staff. People and relatives said staff listened to them and acted on concerns. Relatives told us the manager and deputy manager were approachable and responsive, and that any concerns raised were acted on quickly. Professionals reported that the home was proactive in involving families in multidisciplinary planning, and that people’s perspectives were consistently represented in discussions about care.

Staff made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it. Staff worked to accommodate individual preferences, such as meal choices and adapted activities. staff fully understood people’s needs and how they were to work with people. The multidisciplinary team visited weekly and ensured people received care and treatment in a timely manner. The environment was adapted to meet the various needs of people, such as with their mobility and to reduce risks of falls.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this. For example, staff completed training in equality and diversity to understand and reduce inequalities or prejudices that affected outcomes for people. The registered manager ensured peoples’ social and healthcare needs were fully considered and met. Relatives expressed confidence in the service, saying their loved ones were happy and their needs met.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future. Staff supported people to prepare for life changes, including discharge and end-of-life care. People reported staff were very capable at supporting them to plan for the future. Planning was proactive and holistic. Staff were responsive to changes in people’s health and ensured additional support was arranged promptly. Professionals described the service as forward‑thinking, particularly in its use of technology to help anticipate needs, minimise risks and support comfort towards end‑of‑life.