CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hollyacre Bungalow
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing and managing infection risks. They also asked about staffing pressures and were told that measures were in place to reduce their impact.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, January 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control and found positive staff interactions at Hollyacre Bungalow.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 11 January 2022. It focused on infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic, and on whether staffing pressures were affecting the home.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks. This included using personal protective equipment safely, regular COVID-19 testing, vaccination arrangements, safe visiting, and an up-to-date infection control policy.
The home was inspected but not rated. This was not a full assessment of all five areas of care, so the report does not give a new overall quality rating.
Infection control
The home had systems to reduce the spread of infection among residents, staff and visitors.
“Systems were in place to help prevent people, staff and visitors from catching and spreading infection.” from the report
Use of protective equipment
There was enough protective equipment, and staff were using it correctly during the visit.
“There was enough PPE such as aprons, gloves and masks. Staff were wearing this appropriately when we visited.” from the report
Testing and vaccination
Residents and staff were tested regularly, and a COVID-19 vaccination programme was in place.
“Staff and people were tested regularly for COVID-19. A COVID-19 vaccination programme was in place.” from the report
Staff and resident interactions
Inspectors saw staff working together to support residents' wellbeing during the pandemic.
“Staff had worked as a team to help promote people's wellbeing throughout the pandemic. We observed positive interactions between staff and people.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What staffing pressures are you experiencing now, and what measures are in place to prevent them affecting residents?
- 02How often are residents and staff tested for COVID-19 or other infections?
- 03How do you check that staff and visiting professionals meet the current vaccination or exemption requirements?
- 04How are visits arranged when infection risks change?
- 05When was the infection prevention and control policy last reviewed, and how do you manage any outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and staffing pressures; it did not provide a full rating of all five inspection areas. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 January 2022 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, June 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, respectful care and strong management, with a minor recruitment-record issue to improve.
This was an unannounced planned inspection carried out on 30 April, 11 May and 17 May 2021. The inspector spoke with people, the registered manager and care staff, contacted relatives, and reviewed care records, staff files, rotas and management records.
The home was rated Good overall, with Good ratings for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, suitable safeguarding arrangements and a clean environment. People were treated with dignity, supported to make choices and encouraged to take part in meaningful activities.
The home had systems to check the quality of care and learn from incidents or feedback. Inspectors noted that application forms did not provide enough space for applicants' full work and education history, and the manager said the form would be changed.
Respectful, person-centred care
Staff valued and respected people. They supported people to make choices, be as independent as possible and pursue their own interests.
“People were treated with dignity and respect.” from the report
Meaningful activities
Staff actively supported people to take part in activities that mattered to them, including when day services were closed.
“The staff were passionate about supporting people to engage in meaningful activities and lead lives with meaning.” from the report
Safe care and medicines
Inspectors found suitable safeguarding arrangements, enough staff and safe systems for receiving, storing, giving and destroying medicines.
“Medicines were safely received, stored, administered and destroyed.” from the report
Stable and knowledgeable staff
The staff team had been stable for more than five years. Staff knew people's individual needs and preferences.
“People were observed to be happy and settled and supported by a staff team who knew each person's individual needs and preferences.” from the report
Strong oversight
The home had structured checks on quality and acted on feedback from people, relatives and staff.
“The registered manager maintained clear oversight of the service.” from the report
Recruitment forms
minorInspectors found that application forms did not provide enough space for applicants to record their full work and education history. The manager said the template would be reviewed and changed.
“The application forms did not provide enough room for prospective employees to add their full work and education history.” from the report
- 01Have the application forms been changed so applicants can give their full work and education history?
- 02How do you check that staff remain competent to administer medicines?
- 03How do you make sure people continue to have meaningful activities and pursue their individual interests?
- 04How are feedback and complaints from people, relatives and staff recorded and acted on?
- 05How are infection prevention arrangements kept up to date?
The report gives ratings for Safe and Well-led and included infection prevention and control checks; it does not give separate ratings for Effective, Caring or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 June 2021 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Hollyacre Bungalow
6 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2021Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2018Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2018Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- December 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- September 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 28 January 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
47 live-in carers within about an hour of County Durham
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £960 to £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.