Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at Hylands House Care Home

Goodpublished 22 December 2025, 9 months ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, February 2022

Hylands House was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control and visiting arrangements.

This was a targeted inspection on 11 February 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures were affecting the home.

Inspectors were assured that the home used PPE safely, carried out testing, admitted people safely, and had suitable hygiene and cleaning arrangements. They also found that the infection control policy was up to date.

The home followed government guidance on visiting and kept relatives informed about changes. People were supported to stay in touch with their families during visiting restrictions.

The service was inspected but not rated. This means the inspection did not give an overall quality rating or a rated judgement for Safe.

What inspectors praised
  • Infection control

    Inspectors were assured that staff used PPE safely and that infection control, cleanliness and hygiene were checked regularly.

    “Staff were trained in infection control and how to use PPE safely.” from the report
  • Visitor checks

    Visitors had health checks and were asked for testing and vaccination information where required.

    “Routine checks included checking visitor's temperatures, requesting evidence of a negative lateral flow test and COVID-19 vaccination status” from the report
  • Family contact

    The home helped people keep in touch with relatives during visiting restrictions and shared regular updates.

    “People were supported to stay in touch with their families through face time, telephone calls and garden visits during visiting restrictions.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.

Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How are you currently managing any staffing pressures, and what effect have they had on people's care?
  2. 02What infection control checks and audits are carried out now?
  3. 03How will you tell families about changes to visiting arrangements?
  4. 04How can residents keep in touch with relatives if visiting is restricted?
  5. 05What testing, vaccination and health checks are currently required for visitors and visiting professionals?

This was an announced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 staffing pressures; it did not provide a full service rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 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.

An earlier report, explained

What inspectors found, December 2018

Rated Good overall, but well-led Requires Improvement because checks, audits and records were not consistently effective.

This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 20 November 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and the new manager. They observed care and reviewed care plans, training records, medicines records and management checks.

The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management overall, kind and respectful care, suitable support with food and healthcare, and person-centred care plans that were regularly reviewed.

Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. Checks and audits were not always recorded or effective. Some records were incomplete, staff did not always receive regular development meetings, and there was no organised system for gathering feedback. A new manager had been in post for two weeks and had started making improvements.

What inspectors praised
  • Kind and respectful care

    People felt staff were kind and caring. Staff knew people's preferences and supported their dignity, independence and relationships.

    “People were treated with kindness by staff who knew them well and understood them.” from the report
  • Person-centred support

    Care plans included people's views and wishes and were kept up to date. Staff shared information so they could respond to changing needs.

    “People had person centred care plans which were inclusive of people's views and wishes.” from the report
  • Staffing and safeguarding

    Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff understood how to recognise and report possible abuse and how to manage risks such as falls.

    “The provider ensured there were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to meet people's needs and support them to stay safe.” from the report
  • Food and healthcare

    People received enough food and drink and were supported to attend healthcare appointments and access other services when needed.

    “People had sufficient amounts to eat and drink to ensure their dietary and nutritional needs were met.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Weak oversight and records

    needs fixing

    Audits did not reliably identify problems or show what had been put right. Training records, accident records and other records were not consistently complete.

    “Checks and audits were not always recorded or effective in identifying areas where improvements were required.” from the report
  • Limited family feedback

    minor

    There were no meetings or quality questionnaires to gather people's and relatives' views about the service. The new manager planned to use care reviews to seek wider feedback.

    “We found there were limited systems to obtain feedback from people and relatives about the service” from the report
  • Some improvements still needed

    minor

    The home planned more dementia-friendly signs and visual aids, fuller end-of-life care plans and more activities. One relative said there could be more entertainment.

    “However, one relative told us, "It would be great if they had more entertainment.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What audits and checks are now completed, how often are they reviewed, and how do you show that problems are followed through?
  2. 02How do you record and review accidents, incidents, medicines checks and staff training?
  3. 03How are relatives and residents now asked for feedback, and what changes have been made as a result?
  4. 04What progress has been made with dementia-friendly signs and visual aids, fuller end-of-life plans and activities?

This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, with the overall rating remaining Good and Well-led remaining Requires Improvement. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 December 2018 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Hylands House Care Home

3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.

  1. February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent rating
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    Read what inspectors found at Hylands House Care Home →

  2. December 2018Goodstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read what inspectors found at Hylands House Care Home →

  3. July 2016Goodup from Requires improvement
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. June 2015Requires improvement
    Safe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. June 2014

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. December 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. May 2013

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 May 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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Warwickshire

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 £950 to £1,260 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.

“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
Caroline C., about Mary K.
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
Brian G., about Chris M.
See live-in carers near WarwickshireProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.