CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Lynton Hall Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, safe medicines management and appropriate infection control. Care plans and risk assessments were up to date, and systems for managing incidents and pressure sores had improved.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training, supervision and competency checks. People received care and food suited to their choices and needs, had access to healthcare, and were supported with decision-making.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not inspected during this focused visit.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a clear management structure, effective quality checks and good communication with families and healthcare professionals. People and families were encouraged to share their views.
What inspectors found, October 2023
Rated Good; the home improved from Requires Improvement, with safe, effective and well-led care, but dementia support and refurbishment still need attention.
Inspectors made an unannounced, focused inspection visit on 06 September 2023. They spoke with people living at the home, family members, staff and healthcare professionals. They also checked care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, recruitment files, audits and other records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective and Well-led were each rated Good. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable infection control arrangements and improved systems for managing risks and learning from incidents.
People were supported to make choices about their care, food and clothes. Staff were described as kind and respectful. The home worked with healthcare professionals and had systems to check the quality of care.
This was a focused inspection. Caring and Responsive were not inspected, so their previous ratings were carried forward when calculating the overall rating. The previous overall rating was Requires Improvement, published on 17 June 2022. Inspectors found enough improvement for the home to no longer be in breach of the regulations mentioned from that inspection.
Safe staffing
Inspectors observed enough staff to meet people's needs promptly. Call bell response times were checked and staffing had been increased to help with busy mealtimes.
“During our visit we observed adequate staffing levels that allowed for the timely meeting of people's care needs.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines records were complete and easy to follow. Staff had training and regular competency checks, and audits were used to identify problems.
“People's medicines were managed consistently and safely in line with national guidance.” from the report
Choice and communication
People were supported to make choices about care, clothes, meals and drinks. Staff used pictures and other communication support where needed.
“People received support with communication where they required it.” from the report
Kind staff
People described staff as kind, compassionate and respectful. Inspectors saw staff spending time with people and responding to their wellbeing.
“Staff were kind, compassionate and respectful towards people.” from the report
Improved management
Management checks were being completed and actions were tracked. The home had improved enough to address the governance breach found at the previous inspection.
“Quality assurance processes were in place to inform improvements to the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What refurbishment has been completed since the inspection, and what remains in the dementia improvement plan?
- 02How will you support my relative's particular dementia needs, including communication, orientation and mobility?
- 03What were the previous ratings for Caring and Responsive, and how do you monitor these areas now?
- 04How do you make sure there are enough staff at busy times, especially during meals?
- 05How will you keep my relative's care plan and risk assessments up to date as their needs change?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led only; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 October 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, June 2022
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found risks in pressure ulcer care and management oversight, although medicines, infection control and kindness were strengths.
Inspectors visited on 14 April and 10 May 2022. They spoke with people, a relative, staff and healthcare professionals. They also checked care plans, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was not always safe. Records and procedures for managing pressure ulcers were not consistently followed. Staffing levels did not always allow people to get care at the times or in the way they preferred. Staff also did not receive regular supervision, appraisals and observations.
There were positive findings. Medicines were managed safely. Infection control measures were effective. People said staff were kind and their care needs were met. The home was working within the Mental Capacity Act and people received help with food, drink and healthcare.
The overall rating changed from Good to Requires Improvement. This was a focused inspection covering Safe, Effective and Well-led. Caring and Responsive were not inspected, and their previous ratings were carried forward from the 2018 inspection.
Kind and respectful care
People described staff as pleasant, friendly and kind. Inspectors saw people treated with dignity and compassion.
“We observed that staff treated people with respect, compassion and dignity.” from the report
Medicines managed safely
Medicines records were properly completed and easy to follow. Medicines were stored securely and handled by trained staff.
“Medicines were managed consistently and safely in line with national guidance.” from the report
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely and followed infection control guidance, including for visiting.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Food and healthcare support
People had meal choices, including options for cultural preferences. Their nutritional needs and access to healthcare were managed when needed.
“People's complex care needs in relation to eating and drinking were assessed and managed, along with any associated risks.” from the report
Pressure ulcer care
seriousPressure ulcers were not always managed safely. Inspectors found gaps in records for turning and checking pressure support equipment, and this led to a breach of Regulation 12.
“At the time of inspection, a safeguarding outcome was received noting that a person was at risk of neglect because of poor management of pressure sores at the home.” from the report
Weak management checks
seriousThe provider's checks did not always identify or correct risks. The home also did not always notify CQC about events affecting people's care, leading to a breach of Regulation 17.
“The above meant that governance systems in place were not always operated effectively to minimise the risks associated with people's safety.” from the report
Staffing levels and choices
needs fixingPeople and staff said there were not always enough staff to support people's preferences, including going outside or choosing when to get up and go to bed. CQC recommended a review of staffing levels.
“We recommend the provider to review their staffing levels making sure there was enough staff to meet people's care needs safely and in accordance to their preferences.” from the report
Limited staff supervision
needs fixingSupervision, appraisals and observations were not regular enough. Records of some one-to-one meetings did not fully address issues that had been identified.
“However, supervisions, appraisals and observations were not carried out regularly to monitor staff's performance.” from the report
Working with healthcare professionals
needs fixingHealthcare professionals said agreed actions were not always completed and that responses were not always timely. Inspectors said they would check progress at the next planned inspection.
“The healthcare professionals told us they did not always have an effective working relationship with the service.” from the report
- 01What has changed in how you assess, treat and record pressure ulcers since this inspection?
- 02How do you check that people are turned as planned and that pressure support equipment is checked?
- 03What are the current staffing levels on each shift, and how do you support people's choices about getting up, going to bed and going outside?
- 04How often do staff now receive supervision, appraisals and observations?
- 05What action has been taken to improve communication and follow-up with healthcare professionals?
This was a focused inspection of Safe, Effective and Well-led; Caring and Responsive were not inspected and their previous ratings were carried forward from 2018. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 June 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 Lynton Hall Care Home
8 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Inadequate to Good.
- October 2023Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2022Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2015Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- June 2015Inadequatestayed InadequateSafe: InadequateCaring: InadequateWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2015InadequateSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: InadequateResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 October 2010.
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 Kingston upon Thames
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. 82 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.”
“We cannot speak highly enough of the care that Angelique gave, and would recommend her to anyone else needing a live-in carer.”
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.