CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Holt Farm Care Limited
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed. They found safe admission procedures, effective use of personal protective equipment, regular testing and cleaning, and an outbreak plan.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Holt Farm Care Limited: Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control arrangements during a targeted COVID-19 inspection.
Inspectors visited on 12 March 2021. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic. It looked at infection prevention and control in the care home.
They found robust entry checks, including hand washing, temperature recording and COVID-19 lateral flow tests. New admissions were only accepted after a confirmed negative COVID-19 test. Staff used personal protective equipment correctly, and regular testing and cleaning took place.
People were supported to keep in touch with families through technology and planned visits. The home had an outbreak plan, up-to-date infection control policies and staff support arrangements. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Strong entry and admission checks
The home used hand washing facilities, temperature checks and lateral flow tests at entry. New people were only admitted after a confirmed negative COVID-19 test.
“There were robust entrance procedures in place including, hand washing facilities, temperature recording and Covid-19 lateral flow tests (LFT).” from the report
Good infection control practice
Staff had infection control training and followed personal protective equipment procedures. The home also carried out regular testing and cleaning.
“Staff had been trained in infection prevention and control and Covid-19and followed robust PPE [personal protective equipment] protocols.” from the report
Family contact was supported
People could keep in touch with their families using technology. Visits were allowed when planned with safety measures in place.
“Staff ensured people were able to stay in touch with their families using technology, such as Face Time.” from the report
Outbreak planning
The home had a detailed plan for dealing with a possible COVID-19 outbreak and carried out infection control audits.
“There was a comprehensive contingency plan of what to do in case of an outbreak.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How often are people living here and staff tested for COVID-19 now?
- 02What are the current arrangements for family visits, and how are visitors protected from infection?
- 03How are new admissions tested and kept safe before they move in?
- 04When were the infection control policy and outbreak plan last reviewed?
- 05Can you provide the most recent full inspection rating, as this inspection was only targeted?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not assess the other key questions or provide an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 April 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, March 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with risk assessments not always reviewed on time.
This was an unannounced inspection on 30 January 2018. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, a relative, managers and staff. They also reviewed care, medicines, recruitment, safety and quality records, and received feedback from healthcare professionals.
The home supported up to six people with learning disabilities or mental health needs. Five people lived there during the inspection. Inspectors found that risks, medicines, staffing, cleanliness and safeguarding were managed safely. People received personalised care, were treated with kindness and were supported to make choices, stay independent and take part in activities.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection in February 2017. The earlier concern about opportunities for activities had been addressed.
Safe medicines
Staff were trained and assessed as competent to administer medicines. Records showed that people received their medicines as prescribed.
“Medication administration records (MAR) confirmed people had received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Personalised care
Care records gave staff detailed information about each person's history, preferences, interests, goals and communication needs.
“People received care that was personalised to them.” from the report
Activities and independence
The home had improved the opportunities for activities identified at the previous inspection. People were supported to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
“People were encouraged to participate in the activities they enjoyed.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors found that staff treated people with kindness and compassion, protected their privacy and supported their dignity.
“People were cared for with kindness and compassion.” from the report
Open leadership
People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the home's leadership. Audits, meetings and feedback were used to monitor and improve the service.
“There was a transparent and open culture within the service.” from the report
Risk assessment reviews
needs fixingSome assessments for high-probability risks had not been reviewed within the provider's required three-month period. Inspectors said there was no negative impact on people, but recommended that reviews follow the provider's policy.
“some assessments regarding high-probability risks had not been reviewed within the last three months.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure every high-probability risk assessment is reviewed within the required three-month period?
- 02What activities would be available for my relative, and how would their choices and interests shape the activity plan?
- 03How would you assess and support my relative's specific health, communication and behaviour needs?
- 04How do you involve relatives and healthcare professionals when a person's needs or health changes?
- 05How would you support my relative to make choices and remain as independent as possible?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and checking improvements required after the February 2017 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 March 2018 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 Holt Farm Care Limited
2 rated inspections over a year: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2017Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 April 2016.
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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Oxfordshire
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 £1,300 a week. 32 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
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.