CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Lyndon Croft
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, September 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, personalised care, but some records and family involvement could be better.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 9 August 2022. Inspectors spoke with relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, medicines, recruitment and management records. They also checked infection control.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Responsive and Well-led were rated Good. Inspectors found people were safe, medicines were given correctly, and care reflected people's needs and preferences.
There were some areas to improve. Daily records did not always give enough detail, and some relatives did not feel involved in care planning. Activities had reduced during COVID-19, although the home said these were increasing.
Effective and Caring were not reviewed during this inspection. The overall rating used ratings from the previous inspection for questions that were not inspected. The previous overall rating was Good, published on 12 March 2019.
People were kept safe
Relatives said people were safe, and inspectors observed care that supported this. Staff knew how to manage risks and report safeguarding concerns.
“Relatives said people were safe and well cared for and we observed this was the case.” from the report
Medicines were handled safely
Medicines were given according to instructions and staff checked that people had taken them. Staff received training and competency checks.
“People received their medicines in line with the prescribed instructions such as those medicines which need to be given before or after food.” from the report
Personalised care
Care reflected people's preferences, beliefs and communication needs. Staff were seen offering choices and responding to people's individual cues.
“Staff ensured people's needs were met with care which was individualised and reflected people's preferences, religious and cultural beliefs.” from the report
Good management systems
The provider used audits and reviews to monitor care and support improvements. Staff said they felt supported and could raise concerns.
“The provider ensured the home was well managed.” from the report
Records needed more detail
needs fixingInspectors found that daily records did not always give a complete account of the care people had received. Repositioning charts were not clear, and the provider agreed to review them.
“People's safety and ongoing risk was managed well although daily records could be more detailed to reflect a more accurate account of the care a person had received.” from the report
Family involvement in care plans
needs fixingSome relatives did not always feel consulted about care plans, even though inspectors found the plans reflected people's individuality and were updated when needed.
“Relatives did not always feel they had been consulted about care plans however we found care plans reflected people's individuality and were updated as and when required.” from the report
Activities had reduced
minorRelatives wanted more activities. The home said activities had reduced because of COVID-19 and that the level was increasing with support from an activities coordinator.
“Relatives said they would like to see more activities taking place but acknowledged these had reduced due to Covid-19.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure repositioning charts and daily records clearly show the care given?
- 02How will you involve relatives in agreeing and reviewing care plans?
- 03What activities are currently available, and how often can residents take part?
- 04Who is managing the home while the new manager's registration application is being processed?
- 05What changes have been made following the recent management changes?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Responsive and Well-led only; Effective and Caring were not inspected and the overall rating used ratings from the previous inspection for questions not reviewed. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 September 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.
What inspectors found, February 2022
Lyndon Croft: Targeted inspection found well-managed infection control, but the service was inspected and not rated.
The CQC visited on 26 January 2022. This was an announced, targeted inspection focused on infection prevention, control and visiting arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic. Inspectors also asked about staffing pressures.
Inspectors found good practice. The home appeared clean, used personal protective equipment properly, carried out regular testing, checked visitors and had plans to reduce the spread of infection. The home also had a booking system and a visitor pod.
The service was marked “Inspected but not rated”. This was not a full inspection of all aspects of care, so the report does not give ratings for caring, effective, responsive or well-led.
Infection control
Inspectors found that infection risks were well managed. Policies and procedures were described as robust and up to date.
“Risks to infection were well managed and robust, up to date policies and procedures were in place.” from the report
Testing and protective equipment
Staff were tested at least three times a week and residents every 28 days. Inspectors also found that PPE was used effectively and safely.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Visiting arrangements
Visitors had checks on arrival, including temperature checks and PPE. A booking system and visitor pod were in place.
“The home operated a booking system for visitors to manage the risk and safety of people.” from the report
Reducing spread of infection
The home used social distancing, clean premises and separate zones to help reduce cross-contamination.
“Contingency plans were in place and zones had been introduced to reduce the risk of cross contamination.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Are the visitor booking system, visitor pod and arrival checks still being used?
- 02How often are staff and residents currently tested for COVID-19?
- 03What measures are in place now to manage COVID-19-related staffing pressures?
- 04How are separate zones and other arrangements used if there is an infection outbreak?
- 05When were caring, effective, responsive and well-led aspects of the home last fully assessed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not rate the other key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 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.
Every inspection of Lyndon Croft
4 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 January 2011.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Solihull
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. 78 can care for a couple. 9 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.”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.