The Hollies

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

We identified a breach of the regulations in relation to the management and oversight of the service. Audits were completed but these had failed to identify the areas for improvement identified at this assessment. However, staff told us they were well supported by the registered manager and the owner. They understood the lines of responsibility. Relatives told us they found The Hollies was a well run organisation.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Staff understood their roles and responsibilities and understood how to raise concerns and who with. Supervisions and team meetings were an opportunity to discuss any issues or areas for development. Staff told us they received the support they needed to complete training.

Audits were completed. For example, we saw audits of incidents and accidents and medicines. There was no robust system in place to help ensure areas for improvement were identified and acted upon. Action plans had not been completed to support progress where needed. There were records of when people had fallen but the circumstances of the fall had not always been recorded. This meant patterns and trends may have been missed. Whilst the registered manager has some systems in place to have oversight of the service there was no clear governance structure or plan and things were not always written down. Areas for improvement have not been identified. Also action was not always taken in response to external advice , for example no action had been taken to clear the area around the oil tank. Whilst there was no evidence of impact on people, there was potential for risk. We found records showing one person had fallen and required hospital treatment. No statutory notification had been submitted to CQC following this event. There had been no cleaner employed since October and arrangements for other staff to cover these duties had not been effective. Some of the staff were related to each other and worked together. There was no policy in place to outline what should be in place to help ensure this was managed appropriately. Following the inspection the registered manager shared a policy they had since developed. People were asked for their views on the service. Feedback we saw was positive.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.