CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Lyndhurst House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, October 2019
Lyndhurst House was Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found kind, person-centred care but safety and management systems were not reliable enough.
The inspection took place on 22 August 2019 and was announced. One inspector met all three people living at the home, observed their care, spoke with staff and relatives, and contacted health and social care professionals. The inspector also checked care plans, medicines records, staff files and management records.
People were treated with kindness and supported to make choices, build independence and take part in activities. Staff had suitable training, medicines were managed safely, and people's health, dietary and communication needs were generally supported well.
However, some staff did not follow agreed behaviour support strategies. Concerns about bruising and other wellbeing issues were not always passed to the manager. The home's checks and audits did not give managers a reliable picture of safety and quality. The home was rated Requires Improvement overall, with Safe and Well-led rated Requires Improvement and the other three areas rated Good.
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors observed staff treating people well and showing compassion. People appeared relaxed and comfortable when approaching staff.
“During the inspection we observed staff treated people well. Staff spoke appropriately and respectfully to people and showed kindness and compassion in their interactions.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's histories, preferences, communication methods, risks and support needs. Staff showed that they understood how each person wanted to be supported.
“The Care plan viewed was detailed and included risk information based on the persons individual needs.” from the report
Activities and independence
People were supported to take part in activities, go into the community, maintain relationships and develop practical skills at their own pace.
“People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.” from the report
Medicines managed safely
Staff were trained and checked as competent. Medicines were ordered, stored, recorded and disposed of through suitable arrangements.
“Appropriate arrangements were in place for the ordering, storage and disposal of medicines” from the report
Behaviour support was not always followed
seriousStaff did not fully follow an approved strategy for managing escalations in behaviour. Their description of physical intervention did not completely match the written guidance, although the provider said this part of the intervention would be stopped.
“Their description of how the person was physically restrained did not completely match the recorded strategy for this.” from the report
Concerns were not always reported
seriousA body map recorded bruising in an unusual area, but this had not been brought to the manager's attention or investigated. The report said communication problems had continued from an earlier safeguarding concern.
“This had not been progressed by them or other staff. The registered manager stated they were unaware and did not routinely see body maps” from the report
Management checks missed problems
seriousThe home's audits did not identify the safety and communication issues found by the inspector. This meant managers did not have an accurate overview of what was happening.
“quality monitoring had not been used effectively within the service to identify the issues we have raised and provide an accurate overview of service quality.” from the report
Some risk assessments were missing
needs fixingA bathing risk assessment and a fuller epilepsy risk assessment were not in place for one person when the inspection began. These were corrected during the inspection.
“We noted there was no bathing risk assessment for one person who experienced seizures” from the report
More support with visual communication
minorA professional said staff needed more work and support to understand the importance of using visual communication resources.
“They would however like more work and support provided to staff to ensure they understand the importance of using visual resources with the people they work with.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure every staff member follows each person's current behaviour support strategy, including any physical intervention guidance?
- 02How are bruises, injuries and body maps reported to the manager, reviewed and investigated?
- 03What changes have you made to quality audits so they identify safety and communication problems before CQC does?
- 04How do you check that staff understand and use each person's communication tools, such as picture-based resources?
- 05What action has been completed in response to the breaches of Regulations 13 and 17, and what evidence can you show of improvement?
This was a planned inspection covering all five key questions; Safe and Well-led fell from Good at the previous inspection to Requires Improvement, while the other ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 October 2019 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, February 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with strong management and no reported breaches.
This was an announced inspection on 12 January 2017. It was the first inspection since the home registered in 2014. The inspector reviewed care records, medicines records, staffing, recruitment, training, risk assessments, maintenance and quality checks. They also observed care and spoke with staff, relatives and social care professionals.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable training and detailed personal care plans. People were supported with their health, meals, communication, activities, privacy and family contact.
The home had systems for handling complaints, checking quality and acting on shortfalls. The report does not identify any breaches, enforcement action or areas rated below Good.
Personalised care
Care plans described people's communication, routines, preferences, risks and support needs. Staff were able to explain how they supported each person.
“People had detailed care plans, risk assessments and guidance in place to help staff to support them in an individual way.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw positive relationships between staff and people. Staff respected privacy, dignity and personal choices.
“Staff were caring, kind and respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
There were enough staff for people's needs, with staffing adjusted according to activities, appointments and how many people were staying. Medicines records had no gaps.
“People received their medicines when they needed them and in a way that was safe.” from the report
Activities and family contact
People were supported to choose activities at home and in the community, and to maintain contact with relatives and friends.
“People were supported to take part in the activities that they enjoyed.” from the report
Quality checks
The registered manager and an external auditor carried out regular checks. Actions from these checks were followed up.
“There were systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service being provided.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you adjust staffing when more people are staying at the home at weekends?
- 02How do you make sure medicines prescribed for use 'as and when required' are given safely and reviewed?
- 03How will you involve my relative in choosing meals, activities and daily routines?
- 04How do you keep communication plans and risk assessments up to date when a person's needs change?
- 05How will you keep relatives informed about health appointments, care changes or concerns?
This was an announced first inspection covering all five CQC areas and the overall quality of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 February 2017 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 Lyndhurst House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- October 2019Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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 £1,260 a week. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.