It's true, Cont Healthcare is not means tested.
My mother was put on this by the hospital, very nice of them too it was. We didn't even have to press for it.
Looking back, I now suspect they in doing so they had my mother on the Liverpool Pathway, that is a process of death thru dehydration. On the ward, I was the one who had to get her gradually drinking again, by three times a day visits, after the care home had nearly killed her thru neglect. This continued, even when I had fluid charts up on the hospital wall saying I'd got a litre of drink down her a day. No one assisted or offered to take over or took any interest. This carried on at her posh new care home, run by Barchester, where she was on Continuing Healthcare. I had to come in every other day to give her drink. When we kicked up a fuss, they started up a campaign of harassment against us, which it later turned out had been endorsed secretly by the Council and local NHS Clinical Commissioning Group. It means that carers and nurses spy on you and makes notes, raise spurious safeguarding concerns against you, and so on. Then try to have you barred for 'abuse' so they can finish the job unimpaired, I suspect.
In other words, Continuing Care may be a misnomer, a bit of NHS doublespeak. They won't pay out if it will be continuing for very much longer. That may work for someone with terminal cancer, but for someone with dementia or advanced Parkinson's, well, it may well be their thinking is, right, we're going to kill this one but we'll offer the rellies a sweetener so they feel alright about it. They won't know that ma or pa didn't get enough to drink.
Obviously we did know, and that made us dangerous.
The Liv Pathway still exists in effect. They just don't call it that. They don't call it anything, if it doesn't have a name it's harder to get a handle on.
So it's a case of be careful what you wish for, and whether you get Cont Care most likely depends on how much money the local CCG has.