Hollins Hall

Updated 7 April 2018

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.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 12 and 16 February 2018 and was announced. We visited the office location on 12 February to see the registered manager and staff; and to review care records and policies and procedures. On 16 February we made telephone calls to relatives of people who used the service. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be at the office to speak with us. The inspection team consisted of one adult social care inspector.

Before our inspection, we reviewed information we held about the service, which included information shared with the CQC and notifications sent to us since our last inspection. Notifications are when providers send us information about certain changes, events or incidents that occur and which affect their service or the people who use it.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return to plan our inspection. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection, we visited two people who used the service in their homes and spoke with two relatives on the telephone. We visited the provider's office and spoke with the registered manager, the care administrator, the care assessor, two care workers and the quality assurance auditor.

We reviewed four people's care plans, risk assessments, and the recruitment, training, supervision and appraisal records for two members of staff. We looked at medication administration records, meeting minutes, audits and other records relating to the running of the service.

Following the inspection we spoke with one health and social care professional for their feedback on their experiences of the care provided.

Updated 7 April 2018

Hollins Hall is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own homes within the retirement complex of Hollins Hall. The service's office is located in the complex. It provides a service to older adults, people with dementia, disabilities and younger people. At the time of our inspection the service provided personal care to seven people.

People who live at Hollins Hall have access to a number of on-site facilities, which include a restaurant, swimming pool, exercise area, library and hairdressing salon.

Not everyone using the service receives regulated activity; CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also take into account any wider social care provided.

At our last inspection we rated the service Good. At this inspection, we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good. There was no evidence, or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

The service had 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

There were systems and processes in place to protect people from the risk of harm. Staff were able to tell us about different types of abuse and were aware of action they should take if abuse was suspected. They were confident that the registered manager would address any concerns.

Risk assessments were completed to reduce the risk of harm. Accidents or incidents were analysed to reduce the risk of reoccurrence.

Medicines were administered safely to people when they needed this support. Staff were aware of the infection control measures in place to reduce the risk of the spread of infection.

Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people's needs. There were safe recruitment and selection procedures in place and appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work. Staff received the support and training they needed to give them the necessary skills and knowledge to meet people's assessed needs.

People were supported to eat and drink to promote their wellbeing and staff supported access to healthcare where needed. Health professionals were contacted appropriately to ensure any changes to people's needs were addressed.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

There were positive interactions between people and staff. Staff knew people well and showed kindness, dignity and respect. Care was person centred and people were provided with choice.

The provider had a system in place for responding to people's concerns and complaints. People were regularly asked for their views. There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.