CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Holt Retirement Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention, PPE, testing, cleaning and visitor arrangements. They also found safeguarding systems, personalised risk assessments and regular safety checks.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not reviewed as a separate question during this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not reviewed as a separate question during this targeted inspection, although inspectors observed positive interactions and person-centred support.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not reviewed as a separate question during this targeted inspection, although people were supported to maintain relationships and take part in adapted activities.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors found regular checks, current policies, a contingency plan and an open management style. The report says the previous Well-led rating was Requires Improvement, but this visit did not change that rating.
What inspectors found, July 2021
Inspected but not rated; The Holt Retirement Home had good infection-control findings, but this targeted visit did not give new ratings.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 7 April 2021. It followed concerns about personal care and COVID-19 management. One inspector visited, spoke with people, managers and staff, reviewed records, and carried out further staff interviews by telephone.
Inspectors found positive interactions between people and staff. They found person-centred support, clean premises, effective cleaning schedules, suitable PPE, infection-control procedures, personalised risk assessments and appropriate safeguarding arrangements.
The home had systems for checking care and staff practice. Staff described the registered manager as approachable and responsive. Inspectors also said they had signposted the provider to resources to develop its approach.
This inspection did not give new ratings. Safe and Well-led were both recorded as inspected but not rated because only specific concerns were examined. The report says the overall rating and Safe rating were Good at the previous inspection, while the Well-led section says its previous rating was Requires Improvement.
Infection control
The home had suitable PPE, visitor checks, cleaning arrangements and procedures to reduce the spread of infection.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the premises clean and tidy. Cleaning schedules and infection-control audits were in place.
“The premises were clean and tidy.” from the report
Person-centred support
Staff knew people well and provided support that reflected their individual needs.
“People received person-centred support and staff knew people well.” from the report
Relationships and activities
People were supported to stay in touch with family and friends. Activities were adapted into smaller groups during the pandemic.
“People were supported to maintain important relationships with friends and family.” from the report
Management checks
The registered manager carried out checks on care and staff practice. Staff told inspectors the manager was approachable and responsive.
“The registered manager carried out regular checks on peoples care and staff practices.” from the report
Further development identified
minorCQC signposted the provider to resources to develop its approach. The report does not say this led to a breach or enforcement action.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What actions have you taken in response to the concerns about personal care and COVID-19 management that led to this inspection?
- 02What resources did CQC signpost you to, and what changes have you made as a result?
- 03How do you check that personal care is completed and recorded for each person?
- 04What progress has been made since the previous Well-led rating of Requires Improvement?
- 05How are visitors currently tested, checked and supported to use PPE before entering the home?
This was a targeted inspection of specific concerns about personal care and COVID-19 management; it did not review the full five key questions and did not change the previous ratings. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 July 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 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements, with some further development suggested.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 13 August 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found that visitors were booked and screened before visits. People had access to hand gel, and staff used personal protective equipment safely. The home also had a lead person responsible for keeping infection control policies up to date.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, new admissions, testing, outbreaks, personal protective equipment and infection control policies safely. The CQC signposted the home to resources to develop its approach.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or a separate rating for each of the five key questions.
Visitor safety
Visitors were booked in advance and screened before visiting. They were given accessible information about reducing infection risks.
“The service operated a booking system for visitors. Staff screened relatives ahead of their visit” from the report
Hand hygiene
People were given their own hand sanitising gel, including for times when handwashing facilities were not nearby.
“People were provided with their own sanitising hand gel to ensure they could continue to keep their hands clean” from the report
Up-to-date guidance
A dedicated lead was responsible for keeping infection control policies and procedures current.
“The service had appointed a dedicated lead to ensure policies and procedures remained up to date” from the report
Further development suggested
minorThe CQC signposted the home to resources to develop its infection prevention and control approach. The report does not describe this as a breach.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01What infection prevention and control improvements were made after the CQC signposted resources to the home?
- 02How are visitors currently booked, screened and given information before visiting?
- 03How are new residents admitted safely and tested for infections?
- 04How does the home make sure staff use personal protective equipment correctly?
- 05Who is currently responsible for keeping infection control policies up to date?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures only; the service was inspected but not rated and other areas of care were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 September 2020 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 Holt Retirement Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
- September 2020Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- December 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 May 2014.
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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of North Yorkshire
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 £1,010 to £1,290 a week. 27 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
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.