Archived: Holme View

Holme View is a care home that is located in Holmewood, approximately three miles from Bradford city centre. The service provides accommodation and personal care to a maximum of 35 older people, including people living with dementia. The service is split across two floors with the ground floor providing accommodation for up to 23 people on a permanent basis and the first floor offering 'flexi-beds' for people requiring an assessment of their needs, before returning home or seeking permanent residential care.

The registered provider is required to have a registered manager in post and on the day of the inspection, there was a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 that staff had a good knowledge of how to keep people safe from harm and there were enough staff to meet people's assessed needs. Staff had been employed following appropriate recruitment and selection processes and we found that the recording and administration of medicines was being managed appropriately in the service.

We saw that staff completed an induction process and they had received a wide range of training, which covered courses the home deemed essential, such as safeguarding, moving and handling and infection control, and home specific training such as dementia awareness. However, we found that staff had not completed Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) training and the dementia awareness training in some cases had been completed several years ago. We made a recommendation about this in the report.

The registered manager understood the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and we found that the MCA guidelines had been followed. Staff at the home did not use restraint but the registered manager understood the process to follow to ensure that any restraint was lawful.

We found assessments of risk had been completed for each person and plans had been put in place to minimise risk. The home was clean, tidy and free from odour and effective cleaning schedules were in place.

People's nutritional needs were met. Most people told us they enjoyed the food and that they had enough to eat and drink. We saw people were offered a choice of food and drink and were provided with refreshments throughout the day.

People told us they were well cared for and we saw people were supported to maintain good health and had access to services from healthcare professionals. We found that staff were knowledgeable about the people they cared for and saw they interacted positively with people living in the home. People were able to make choices and decisions regarding their care.

People’s comments and complaints were responded to appropriately and there were systems in place to seek feedback from people and their relatives about the service provided. We saw that any comments, suggestions or complaints were appropriately actioned.

We found the registered provider had audits in place to check that the systems at the home were being followed and people were receiving appropriate care and support.

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people who used the service, their relatives, staff supporting them and from looking at records.

Is the service safe?

People told us they felt safe. Safeguarding procedures were robust and staff we spoke with understood how to safeguard the people they supported.

Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learnt from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns, whistleblowing and investigations. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed with them, and they were involved in writing their plans of care.

People's needs were taken into account with signage and the layout of the service enabling people to move around freely and safely.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that care workers showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people.

People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.

Is the service responsive?

People completed a range of activities in and outside the service regularly.

People using the service, their relatives, friends and other professionals involved with the service completed an annual satisfaction survey. Where shortfalls or concerns were raised these were addressed.

People knew how to make a complaint if they were unhappy. People told us they had never needed to make a complaint but if they did they thought complaints would be investigated and action taken as necessary.

Is the service well-led?

The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care in a joined up way.

Staff had attended several training courses which took into account the needs of the people who used the service. This ensured that people's needs were met.

'I like it here the food is very good.'

'I can't fault the place the staff are great and keep me fully informed about my relative's wellbeing.'

'I enjoy working here it's a good staff team.'

We saw that people looked well cared for and staff were attentive to people's needs. We saw that people were treated with respect and people using the service responded positively to staff.

We found the system for administering medication was managed safely.

Our conversations with people, relatives and staff, together with observations on the day of our inspection evidenced that there were enough staff on duty.

The provider had appropriate systems in place for gathering and evaluating information about the quality of care the service provided. Records were up to date and stored safely.

We spoke with four people who used the service. They told us they made decisions and choices about their daily lives. We spoke with four relatives during, all said they were involved in making decisions about their relatives care. One said the home was 'really good at supporting and involving families'.

Relatives told us they were happy with the care provided. One said, 'the care could not be any better, it is second to none'. Another relative told us, 'you know your relative is safe and being well looked after'.

People told us staff were kind and treated them well. One relative said, ' staff go above and beyond' to care for people.

All four relatives told us they had never complained about the home. They said if they had a concern they would raise this with staff and felt they would be listened to.

We spoke with a visiting healthcare professional during our inspection. They had no concerns about the standard of care provided at the home and said staff always followed their guidance.