CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Holmdale
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found safe systems for safeguarding, medicines, infection control, risk management and staffing. Staff were trained, checks were completed before recruitment, and enough staff were on duty.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and reviewed. Staff had suitable training, people received support with their diets and fluids, and healthcare needs were understood and met.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. They understood people's individual ways of communicating and supported important relationships.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Support plans reflected people's needs, likes and dislikes. Information was available in accessible formats, and people were supported with activities, hobbies and relationships.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager and staff were described as supportive and approachable. Audits and action plans were used to monitor quality, and the home worked well with health and social care organisations.
What inspectors found, September 2021
Holmdale was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with only minor room to improve how feedback is recorded.
Inspectors visited on 19 and 20 August 2021. They met all four people living in the home, spoke with a relative, professionals, the manager and staff, and reviewed care, recruitment, medicines, health and safety and quality records.
All five areas were rated Good. Inspectors found people were safe, supported by experienced staff, offered suitable food and helped with their health needs. The home was clean and infection control was well managed.
Care was personalised and respectful. Staff understood how people communicated, supported their choices and relationships, and helped people take part in activities and community life.
This was a planned inspection of a service already rated Good. All five ratings remained Good compared with the previous inspection.
Safe care
Inspectors found systems to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm. Medicines, infection control, risks and staffing were all managed safely.
“People were protected from abuse and the risk of abuse.” from the report
Personalised support
Staff knew people's needs, wishes and individual communication styles. Care plans gave staff clear guidance about how to support each person.
“Care plans and the support they needed was detailed to show clear guidance.” from the report
Kind and respectful relationships
Inspectors observed caring interactions. People were treated with dignity and supported to maintain important relationships.
“We observed caring and kind interactions throughout the inspection.” from the report
Good leadership
Staff felt supported by approachable management. The home used audits and action plans to monitor and improve care.
“The provider had continued to assess quality and used their audits and action plans effectively to demonstrate good practice and good management within the service.” from the report
Showing how feedback leads to change
minorThe manager said they would look at how to record ongoing feedback more clearly, including how it affected people's support. This was a minor improvement point rather than a breach.
“The registered manager advised they would look at how they could collate this ongoing feedback to show how it positively impacts on people's support.” from the report
- 01How do you record and act on ongoing feedback from people and their families?
- 02How will you support my relative's individual way of communicating their needs and choices?
- 03How will you make sure my relative's care plan stays up to date as their needs change?
- 04What activities, hobbies and community opportunities could you offer my relative?
- 05How would you support my relative with their specific diet, medicines and healthcare needs?
This inspection covered all five CQC key questions and included the home's premises, care, records, staffing, infection control and quality monitoring. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 September 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.
What inspectors found, September 2017
Rated Good and taken out of special measures after inspectors found major improvements in safety, care and management.
Inspectors visited without notice on 25 July 2017. They looked at all five areas used for CQC ratings: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. They spoke with one resident, staff and managers, observed care, and checked care and management records.
The home was rated Good in every area. Inspectors found that risks were assessed, medicines were generally managed safely, staffing was sufficient, and people's health, nutrition and communication needs were being supported.
Staff were described as kind, patient and respectful. People were supported to make choices and take part in activities. The home had also introduced stronger checks, audits and feedback systems to monitor care.
At the previous inspection in February 2017, the home was rated Inadequate and placed in special measures because of several legal and care failures. Inspectors found significant improvement and removed the home from special measures.
Risk planning
Inspectors found that risks such as falls and choking had been assessed, planned for and kept up to date.
“Risks to people's health, safety and wellbeing had been assessed and planned for.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff were observed to be patient, encouraging and respectful. They supported privacy, dignity and everyday choices.
“Staff interactions were observed to be caring, motivational, encouraging and patient.” from the report
Personalised activities
People had activity calendars and were supported with hobbies, visits, outings and community activities suited to their interests.
“Each person had a calendar of activities displayed in their room and in their care file.” from the report
Stronger oversight
The provider had introduced regular audits and an improvement plan covering care, medicines, finances, incidents, staff records and legal safeguards.
“A continuous improvement plan had been implemented, which contained a clear vision of what was expected of the service and key performance indicators.” from the report
Medicine records
needs fixingOne person's medicine profile had not been updated after a medicine was discontinued. The report says the medicine was not given and the medicines record itself had been updated.
“We did find that one person's medication profile had not been updated after one medicine had been discontinued, but the MAR had been updated and the medicine had not been given.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that medicine profiles are updated immediately when a medicine is stopped?
- 02What has been put in place to make sure the front door is always kept secure?
- 03How does my relative communicate choices about daily care, food and activities?
- 04How are healthcare professionals' instructions, including advice about safe eating and drinking, recorded and checked?
- 05How are the new audits and improvement checks reviewed to make sure standards have been maintained since this inspection?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating; inspectors spoke with one resident because other residents could not communicate verbally, and reviewed two people's care records. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 September 2017 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 Holmdale
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- September 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Goodup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- June 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 December 2010.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Halton
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 £980 to £1,260 a week. 89 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during 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.