Sholden Hall Residential Home

Date of assessment: 9 February to 23 February 2026. The service is a residential care home supporting up to 27 older people, some who were living with dementia. At our last assessment we identified breaches of regulation in relation to safe care, good governance, safeguarding and employment of fit and proper people. We issued warning notices in relation to safe care and good governance. We completed this assessment to check the provider had taken action to address the breaches and found improvements had been made.

The provider had complied with the warning notices and the breaches in relation to safe care and treatment, safeguarding and employment of fit and proper people had been met. However, we found there continued to be a breach of good governance.

There was a new manager who had been in post 2 months at the time of our assessment who was in the process of starting their registration with CQC. They had prioritised improvements related to the warning notices and keeping people safe, they acknowledged further improvements were needed. Concerns relating to infection control and the environment included, chipped tiles in rooms, or tiles which were falling off the wall. There was furniture which was chipped and peeling which could not be cleaned effectively. The manager had completed an audit of the service and identified some shortfalls. However, they had not compiled an action plan to show how they were going to rectify the shortfalls. The provider had completed regular checks but had not identified the shortfalls found by our assessment or the manager. Following the assessment, the provider had replaced the tiles and some furniture.

People were now protected from potential harm, abuse and discrimination. Staff understood their role to report concerns and were confident they would be acted upon. Potential risks to people’s health and welfare had been assessed and there were detailed person-centred guidance for staff to mitigate risks. There had been improvements in the management of medicines, however, some of the records were not always accurate. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Staff had received training and supervision; the manager had started to complete competency assessments. There had been no new staff employed since the last assessment, but the manager had reviewed staff recruitment files to make sure all the required information had been obtained.

People’s capacity had been assessed and detailed in their care plans, staff supported people following the principles of the Mental Capacity Act. Staff referred people to healthcare professionals when their needs changed and had followed the guidance given.

This service has been in Special Measures since 11 November 2025. The provider demonstrated improvements had been made. The service is no longer rated as Inadequate overall or in any of the key questions. Therefore, this service is no longer in Special Measures.

Date of Assessment: 02 July to 21 July 2025. The service is a residential care home supporting up to 27 older people, some living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 27 people living at the service.

We identified 2 continued breaches of the legal regulation in relation to safe care and treatment, and good governance. We identified 2 further breaches of the legal regulations in relation to safeguarding and employment of fit and proper persons.

People had not always effectively been safeguarded from potential harm. Risks in relation to people’s health such as diabetes continued not to be effectively managed. Guidance was not always in place or detailed to help staff provide safe care for people’s specific health or care needs and for people with anxieties. Risk mitigation strategies were not consistently followed. People had not been protected against the risk of infection or fire. Medicines were not always managed safely. There were now enough staff to support people safely although staff deployment had not always been effective. We received mixed feedback from people about whether there were enough staff to meet their needs, none shared any negative impact they had experienced from the staffing levels. Staff had not always been recruited safely.

People’s needs were assessed, and staff worked with other professionals and external agencies to try and meet people’s needs including physical and mental health. However, this was not always done effectively and people were not always supported to live healthier lives.

People’s capacity was assessed however the principles of the Mental Capacity Act were not always followed. For example, when people were assessed as having capacity their decisions were not always respected. Restrictions including restraint were not always lawfully carried out.

The quality assurance systems continued not to be effective and did not identify the issues we found during this inspection. Audits had not been effectively carried out to identify the issues with risk management and care provision that we found. The provider had begun to take action following the inspection to address some of the concerns we identified.

Robust learning had not taken place to prevent repeat incidents and concerns within the service. Accidents and incident were not always recorded with details to enable the management to have clear oversight and identify patterns or trends.

Staff knew people well and supported people in a kind and caring way. Staff were positive about the management. Professionals provided positive feedback about the staff. They said, “The carers show kindness and are welcoming to our nurses when visiting in the home.” Professionals told us the service worked in partnership for example seeking advice and made referrals.

In instances where CQC have decided to take civil or criminal enforcement action against a provider, we will publish this information on our website after any representations and/ or appeals have been concluded.We have also asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.

This service is being placed in special measures. The purpose of special measures is to ensure that services providing inadequate care make significant improvements. Special measures provide a framework within which we use our enforcement powers in response to inadequate care and provide a timeframe within which providers must improve the quality of the care they provide.

During this inspection we spoke to 10 people living at the service, 3 relatives, 8 staff including the Provider, Registered Manager, Head of Care, Seniors, Carers, Kitchen and Domestic staff. We sought and received feedback from professionals working with the service. We observed staff practices and people’s experience of care and looked at records to support this.