CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Greenview Hall
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Risk assessments covered areas such as falls, mobility, skin integrity and nutrition, and accidents and incidents were reviewed to reduce the chance of problems happening again.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before moving in and used to create detailed care plans. Staff had relevant training, healthcare referrals were made promptly and the principles of the Mental Capacity Act were followed.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with dignity and respect, knew them well and involved them in decisions. People could personalise their rooms, receive visitors and maintain their independence.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Care and activities were strongly tailored to individual interests, cultural and religious needs. The home supported people to maintain relationships, take part in community life and avoid social isolation.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive culture, approachable management and systems for checking care quality. People, relatives and staff were involved in decisions and their feedback was used to make improvements.
What inspectors found, September 2023
Rated Good overall, with Outstanding personalised support for people's interests, culture and relationships.
This was the first inspection since the home was newly registered. It was unannounced and took place on 06 June 2023. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, and reviewed care plans, medicines records, recruitment checks and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. Inspectors found people felt safe, received their medicines as prescribed, had suitable care plans and were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff knew people's needs and there were enough staff for people not to be left waiting for care.
Responsive care was rated Outstanding. Inspectors found an unusually wide range of activities and strong support for people's individual interests, cultural traditions, community links and relationships. The overall Good rating means the home met the required standards at this inspection, while Responsive was judged to be exceptionally strong.
Personalised activities
The home arranged activities around people's interests and ambitions, including trips, concerts, sporting events and creative groups. Staff also supported people who preferred individual activities rather than groups.
“Staff had organised activities for people based on their individual interests.” from the report
Culture and equality
People were supported to follow their cultural, religious and personal traditions. The home also celebrated different cultures and promoted equality and diversity.
“Equality and diversity was promoted throughout the home.” from the report
Preventing loneliness
Staff worked actively to help people build relationships and contribute to the community. Inspectors found examples of improved wellbeing through activities, charity work and community links.
“Staff worked hard to ensure people did not become socially isolated.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People said staff were kind and attentive. Staff knew people's histories and preferences and used this knowledge to communicate in meaningful ways.
“People told us they felt staff were kind and attentive to their needs.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were stored securely, records had no gaps in administration and stock balances were correct. Staff were trained and their competence was checked regularly.
“People received their medicines in line with their prescriptions.” from the report
Strong management oversight
The management team used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor care and identify improvements. People, relatives and staff said they felt listened to.
“There was a positive culture and staff worked to ensure the aims and values of the service were embedded into their day-to-day practice.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and review my relative's individual interests, routines, cultural needs and communication preferences?
- 02What activities are available for people who do not want to join group activities, and how will you help my relative avoid becoming isolated?
- 03How will you make sure my relative receives medicines safely and that any changes or concerns are recorded and reviewed?
- 04How do you check that staffing levels are sufficient at weekends and at different times of day?
- 05How will you involve me and my relative in care reviews, complaints and decisions about treatment?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC quality questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe; it was the first inspection of the newly registered service. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 September 2023 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 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong COVID-19 arrangements, but some face masks did not fit properly.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 25 August 2021. It focused on infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic, rather than the full quality of care.
Inspectors were assured about most areas, including visits, testing, admissions, cleaning, outbreak planning and the home’s infection control policy. People were also supported to keep in touch with loved ones and take part in activities.
Inspectors were only somewhat assured about the use of personal protective equipment. A few staff had masks that did not fit properly. The home acted immediately by giving extra support, updating checks and monitoring mask use.
The service was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall rating or ratings for the other four key questions.
Emotional and social support
People were supported to keep in touch with loved ones, take part in activities and have visits during pandemic restrictions. Families were involved in planning support for people's wellbeing.
“People had received support around their social and emotional wellbeing throughout the pandemic.” from the report
Clean environment and outbreak planning
Inspectors found the home clean, with handwashing facilities, sanitiser and PPE available. There were clear plans for managing COVID-19 outbreaks.
“The home was clean and personal protective equipment (PPE) as well as handwashing facilities and hand sanitiser were easily available for staff and visitors.” from the report
Staff training and testing
Staff received COVID-19, infection control and PPE training. Staff and agency workers were supported with regular testing and vaccinations.
“Staff received a range of COVID-19 specific training around the disease itself, as well as infection prevention and control (IPC) and PPE use” from the report
Some masks did not fit properly
needs fixingInspectors saw a few staff wearing ill-fitting face masks. The home responded immediately with extra guidance, individual support and additional monitoring.
“We observed a few staff had ill-fitting face masks during our inspection.” from the report
- 01What action was taken after inspectors found that some staff had ill-fitting face masks?
- 02How do you now check that staff and agency workers are wearing correctly fitted masks?
- 03How are visits currently arranged and what infection control measures are used?
- 04How are people's outstanding health needs and nutritional needs reviewed after disruption caused by the pandemic?
- 05How often are infection outbreak plans and cleaning arrangements reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, with the Safe question inspected but not rated; the other four key questions were not assessed in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 September 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.
Every inspection of Greenview Hall
2 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- September 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2019GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- February 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 February 2018.
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
77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey
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 £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
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.