CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Surrey Views
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks, safeguarding, staffing, infection control, emergencies and medicines were managed safely. Medicines records had been completed correctly with no gaps.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supported, understood people's communication methods and helped people eat, drink and access health professionals. People's mental capacity and consent were respected.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, respect and patience. They supported privacy, dignity, independence and relationships, including during hospital stays.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and personalised. People had communication support tailored to them and access to activities, holidays, education and community opportunities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open and inclusive culture, good feedback from relatives and staff, accurate records and effective quality checks. A permanent registered manager was not in post for most of 2018, but this had not affected care quality.
What inspectors found, December 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and highly personalised care, with no serious risks or concerns.
Inspectors visited the home without notice on 6 November 2018. They observed care, spoke with relatives, the manager and staff, and reviewed care plans, medicines records, accident records, staff files and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that risks and medicines were managed safely, staffing levels were sufficient, and staff were trained and supported.
People received individual care and support. Staff helped people communicate, make choices, stay independent, access activities and use health services. Relatives spoke positively about the kindness, respect and dedication of staff.
The home had no permanent registered manager for most of 2018, but a manager was being trained and registered at the time of the inspection. Inspectors said care quality had not been affected. The overall Good rating continued from the previous inspection.
Safe medicines and staffing
Medicines were stored securely, records were complete and audits were carried out. Staffing levels were sufficient for people's needs, including one-to-one support where funded.
“All medicine administration records had been filled out correctly and with no gaps.” from the report
Skilled communication
Staff understood how people communicated through speech, facial expression, body language, gesture and touch. They used this knowledge to help people make choices and reduce anxiety.
“Staff were exceptionally skilled at recognising people's individual behavioural triggers which in turn enabled them to effectively de-escalate people's anxieties and frustrations.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff supported people's dignity, privacy, independence and relationships. Inspectors found that staff showed particular commitment when people needed to stay in hospital.
“Staff went above and beyond their duties to treat people with kindness and compassion.” from the report
Personalised activities
People were supported to enjoy activities suited to their interests and abilities, including day-centre visits, swimming, holidays, trips out and events at the home.
“People had excellent access to educational and leisure opportunities that were bespoke to their preferences and interests.” from the report
Good oversight
The provider used audits, surveys, meetings and feedback to monitor the service and identify improvements. Records were accurate and significant events were reported appropriately.
“The provider had robust quality assurance systems which operated across all levels of the service.” from the report
Management continuity
minorThere was no permanent registered manager for most of 2018. Inspectors said this had not affected the quality of care, but families may still want to understand the current management arrangements.
“This service had not had a permanent registered manager for the majority of 2018.” from the report
- 01Who is the registered manager now, and how have management arrangements changed since the inspection?
- 02How would you support my relative's specific way of communicating, including any use of touch, gestures or signs?
- 03How would you recognise and respond to my relative's individual behavioural triggers or signs of anxiety?
- 04What activities, day services, holidays or community opportunities would be available for my relative?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in reviewing their care plan and making decisions?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, covering all five CQC questions and reviewing care, records, staffing, medicines and quality systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 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.
Every inspection of Surrey Views
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 December 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
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.