We carried out a review of the data available to us about Holly House Residential Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Holly House Residential Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Holly House is a care home providing accommodation for 10 adults with learning disabilities. It is situated on the edge of Parkgate, an area of Rotherham. It stands in its own grounds and has off road parking. It provides accommodation on both the ground and first floor and has accessible gardens which surround the building.
The Secretary of State has asked the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to conduct a thematic review and to make recommendations about the use of restrictive interventions in settings that provide care for people with or who might have mental health problems, learning disabilities and/or autism. Thematic reviews look in-depth at specific issues concerning quality of care across the health and social care sectors. They expand our understanding of both good and poor practice and of the potential drivers of improvement.
As part of thematic review, we carried out a survey with the registered manager at this inspection. This considered whether the service used any restrictive intervention practices (restraint, seclusion and segregation) when supporting people.
The service used positive behaviour support principles to support people in the least restrictive way. No restrictive intervention practices were used.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.
The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties. It was registered for the support of up to 12 people. Ten people were using the service. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However, the size of the service having a negative impact on people was reduced by the building design fitting into the surrounding area and people having access to community-based facilities. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found:
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
The service applied the principles and values that apply the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.
There were suitable and sufficient numbers of qualified staff to support people in line with their assessed needs.
The provider had policies and procedures in place to protect people from abuse.
The service ensured people had enough to eat and drink and catered for different dietary requirements. People were supported to access healthcare services when necessary.
People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs. The provider was working in line with the Accessible Information Standards and people were able to complain.
The service had a positive person-centred culture.
Both people and staff told us the registered manager was approachable, the service worked in partnership with others and engaged people and staff.
The service was displaying its current rating as required and had sent us notifications when necessary.
Systems and processes used to check the quality of the service needed to be further embedded into practice.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection: The last rating for this service was good (last report was published 17 February 2017).
Why we inspected:
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up:
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
Holly House is a care home providing accommodation for 12 younger adults. It is situated on the edge of Parkgate, an area of Rotherham. It stands in its own grounds and has off road parking. It provides accommodation on both the ground and first floor and has accessible gardens which surround the building.
The service had a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People who used the service who we spoke with, told us they were happy with how care and support was provided at the home. They spoke positively about the staff and the way the home was managed.
We saw there were systems in place to protect people from the risk of harm. Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about safeguarding people and were able to explain the procedures to follow should an allegation of abuse be made. Assessments identified risks to people, and management plans to reduce the risks were in place to ensure people’s safety.
We found the service to be meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The staff we spoke with had a satisfactory understanding and knowledge of this, and people who used the service had been assessed to determine if a DoLS application was required.
People were involved in menu planning, shopping and meal preparation. We saw snacks were available throughout the day and people had access to the kitchen and were able to access drinks and food when they wanted.
Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and spoke to people with understanding, warmth and respect.
There was a recruitment system in place that helped the employer make safer recruitment decisions when employing new staff. Staff had received a structured induction into how the home operated, and their job role, at the beginning of their employment. They had access to a varied training programme that met the needs of the people using the service.
There was a system in place to tell people how to make a complaint and how it would be managed. We saw the complaints policy was easily available to people using and visiting the service.
There were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. The registered manager was introducing more robust systems at the time of our inspection and these needed to be fully implemented and embedded into practice.
The inspection was unannounced, and the inspection visit was carried out over two days; 9 September 2015 and 15 September 2015. The home was previously inspected in November 2014, where multiple breaches of regulations were identified. In response to this, we took enforcement action.
Holly House Residential Home is a 12 bed care home, providing care to adults with learning disabilities. At the time of the inspection there were ten people living at the home. The home’s deputy manager told us that it was unlikely the other two bed spaces would ever be used as they were beds in twin occupancy rooms, which the home used as single occupancy instead. They told us that these rooms would, however, give them flexibility should they ever admit partners or relatives who wished to share a room.
Holly House is located in the Parkgate suburb of Rotherham, South Yorkshire. It is in its own grounds in a quiet and secluded area.
The service has a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
During both days of the inspection people told us that they were very happy with their experience of life at Holly House. Staff we spoke with and observed understood people’s needs and preferences well. Staff promoted choice in their interactions with people, and we observed staff emphasised a positive environment within the home and respected people’s rights to privacy and dignity.
The provider had taken appropriate steps to ensure that people’s mental capacity was assessed and that care was provided in accordance with people’s consent. However, we found improvements could be made to ensure judgements about people’s capacity were taken at the correct level.
The provider had effective systems in place to ensure people’s safety. This included staff’s training and knowledge about safeguarding, and up to date and thorough risk assessments. Medicines were handled safely and were well managed.
There was an effective and improved audit system in place, which monitored the quality of care provided and the safe running of the service. This system was relatively new, so it was not yet clear whether it was contributing to long term improvements in the home.
The inspection was unannounced, and the inspection visit was carried out over two days; 19 November and 20 November 2014. The home was previously inspected in October 2013, where no breaches of legal requirements were identified.
Holly House Residential Home is a 12 bed care home, providing care to adults with learning disabilities. At the time of the inspection there were ten people living at the home.
Holly House is located in the Parkgate suburb of Rotherham, South Yorkshire. It is in its own grounds in a quiet area.
The service has a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
During the inspection people told us, or indicated, that they enjoyed life at the home, and staff we spoke with and observed understood people’s needs and preferences well. Staff were able to describe people’s interests and behaviours in detail.
Throughout the inspection we saw that staff showed people using the service a high degree of respect and took steps to maintain their privacy and dignity. Staff we spoke with could describe how they respected people and ensured their privacy, and why it was important to do so.
We found that monitoring and quality assessment arrangements were insufficient to ensure people were cared for safely or in accordance with their needs. This included the management of people’s personal finances and their medication. There were arrangements in place to regularly review people’s needs and preferences, however, changes to people’s needs were not always appropriately acted upon.
Where people lacked the mental capacity to make decisions about their care and welfare, the correct legal procedures were not followed. The home’s management team did not show a strong knowledge about this area and information about how people made decisions was lacking.
We found the provider did not have effective systems in place to ensure people’s safety. Risk assessments were lacking in detail or didn’t cover all areas of risk that people were vulnerable to. Staff’s knowledge of safeguarding procedures was weak, and the provider’s own safeguarding policy did not describe the appropriate steps to follow should safeguarding concerns be identified. The checks that the provider carried out before staff started work were inadequate to ensure people’s safety.
You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.
People who used the service understood the care and treatment choices available to them. They were encouraged to express their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment. One person said, "I was involved in writing my care plan, I am happy with it. I am able to make decisions about keeping my independence."
Throughout our visit, we saw that staff treated people with dignity and kindness. We observed that a friendly and positive approach was used, to ensure that the wishes and needs of people using the service were respected.
People were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment. However improvements were needed to ensuite facilities.
The people who lived in the home were kept safe because the provider had taken steps to maintain the building and we saw that regular health and safety checks had been carried out.
People received care and treatment from suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work.
People were protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment because their records had been reviewed and updated regularly.
People were encouraged to make choices about their care and treatment. People told us they were involved in making decisions about holidays. One person told us they were saving up to go back to Spain for their holiday, while another person said they preferred holidays in England.
People told us they felt safe and would tell staff if they were worried about anything. They said they knew how to tell staff about concerns they had.
Throughout our visit, we saw that staff treated people with dignity and kindness. We observed that a friendly and positive approach was used, to ensure that the wishes and needs of people using the service were respected.
We found people were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Staff were able to describe different methods of communicating with people to ensure their wishes and beliefs were respected.
We found medication was administered safely to people. People were given appropriate support, to ensure they had taken their medication as prescribed.
People told us they were respected and encouraged to be as independent as possible, while remaining safe and protected from harm.
People felt they were able to make decisions about their care and staff supported them when needed.