CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Hollies and Hollies Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing infections, using protective equipment safely, arranging testing and managing visits. They also found that the home met the requirement for non-exempt staff and visiting professionals to be vaccinated against COVID-19.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not rated in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not rated in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, February 2022
The Hollies and Hollies Lodge was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong COVID-19 safety measures and support for residents.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 18 January 2022. This was a targeted inspection about infection prevention, visiting arrangements and staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
They found that the home took timely action to reduce infection risks. This included regular testing, cleaning, temperature checks, effective use of protective equipment and checks on vaccination status.
Staff gave residents consistent support and guidance. The home also provided activities indoors when community activities were restricted.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not provide a new overall quality rating or full ratings for all five areas of care.
Infection control
The home used testing, cleaning and temperature checks. Inspectors said the effect of COVID-19 had been limited and contained.
“Regular testing, cleaning and other precautions such as monitoring temperatures has meant the impact of COVID-19 has been minimal and has been contained.” from the report
Support during restrictions
Staff gave residents consistent support and guidance. Indoor activities were developed as an alternative to activities in the community.
“Staff have provided consistent support and guidance to people.” from the report
Safe visiting arrangements
The home carried out checks for visiting professionals and followed the relevant vaccination requirements.
“Where visiting professionals attended the service appropriate checks were in place including checking their vaccination status.” from the report
Action by management
Inspectors found that the management team acted promptly and helped residents understand risks and their responsibilities.
“The provider took timely actions to keep people safe and follow the government guidance.” from the report
Cleaning residents' rooms
minorInspectors said cleaning of individual rooms depended on the person's support and cooperation. Ask how the home manages this when someone cannot or does not want to cooperate.
“People's individuals rooms were cleaned as appropriate but this was dependent on the persons support and cooperation.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure a resident's room is cleaned if they cannot or do not want to cooperate?
- 02What infection control and testing arrangements are in place now?
- 03How can families visit, and what checks or restrictions currently apply?
- 04How do you manage staffing pressures if staff are absent because of COVID-19?
- 05What activities are available when a resident cannot take part in community activities?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 February 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, September 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and recovery-focused care, with some records still needing closer checking.
This was an unannounced inspection after the previous rating of Requires Improvement. Inspectors spoke with 16 people and eight staff. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files, rotas, training information and management checks.
The home supported 24 people with mental health needs and could support up to 27. Inspectors found a calm atmosphere, enough trained staff, safe medicines practice and clean surroundings. People were supported to make choices, build daily living skills and work towards personal goals.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The previous inspection had found several breaches of regulations. This inspection found enough improvement and no current breaches.
Focus on independence
The home had changed its approach to focus on recovery, personal goals and helping people develop everyday skills.
“Since the last inspection the management had worked hard to change the ethos and culture in the service to focus on recovery and promoting people's independence.” from the report
People felt safe
People described the atmosphere as calm and said they felt safe. Staff understood how to recognise and report abuse.
“There was a positive and calm atmosphere and people told us they felt safe.” from the report
Kind staff relationships
Staff knew people well and inspectors saw a good rapport between staff and residents.
“Staff knew people well and we observed a good rapport between people and staff.” from the report
Personal goals and activities
People had regular meetings with recovery workers and were supported with goals such as cooking, budgeting, work and community activities.
“Each person had their own recovery worker and were supported in areas such as living skills, work, relationships and addictive behaviours.” from the report
Improved management
Management checks, staff observations and record audits had improved since the previous inspection.
“There were robust systems and processes in place to monitor the quality of care.” from the report
Some care plan information conflicted
needs fixingWhen care plans were updated, not every section was always changed. This sometimes left contradictory information, although the manager knew about the issue and had checks in place.
“Sometimes when care plans were updated they had not always been updated in all sections which meant there was sometimes contradictory information in plans.” from the report
No end of life care
minorThe home said it was not set up to provide end of life care. It aimed to help people find alternative accommodation if they became more frail.
“The service did not provide end of life care.” from the report
- 01How will you make sure every part of a care plan is updated when a person's needs or goals change?
- 02How would you support my relative to develop independence and work towards their own recovery goals?
- 03What medicines could my relative self-administer, and how would you assess and review this?
- 04What would happen if my relative became more frail or needed end of life care?
- 05How would you support my relative to take part in community activities that match their interests?
This was an unannounced planned inspection based on the previous rating and covered all five key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 September 2019 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 The Hollies and Hollies Lodge
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at The Hollies and Hollies Lodge →
- September 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at The Hollies and Hollies Lodge →
- September 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 August 2013.
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
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Norfolk
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 £990 to £1,120 a week. 9 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
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.