CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Sheldon House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Individual risk assessments, safeguarding arrangements, staffing levels and medicines systems were found to be effective.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's physical, mental and social needs were assessed, and staff had relevant training. People were supported with food, healthcare, independence and decision-making.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- Inspectors found exceptionally compassionate and personalised care. People were treated with dignity, involved in their care and supported to express their preferences.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and person-centred, with regular reviews and guidance about changes in people's wellbeing. Complaints were taken seriously and responded to in good time.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an open and inclusive culture, approachable leadership and regular checks on quality and safety. Staff understood their roles and worked effectively as a team.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Sheldon House: Rated Good overall; inspectors found exceptionally caring, safe and well-managed support.
This was an unannounced inspection on 1 August 2019. Inspectors reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management checks. They spoke with people living at the home, staff and other organisations, and observed daily life.
The home supported up to six people with mental health-related needs. Inspectors found people were safe, their medicines were managed properly, and there were enough staff. Care was tailored to each person, and people were supported to make choices, build skills and become more independent.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led were rated Good. Caring was rated Outstanding, improving from Good at the previous inspection in 2017.
Exceptionally kind care
Inspectors saw a strong person-centred culture. Staff showed empathy and provided highly personalised support.
“There was a strong, visible person-centred culture. The service ensured that staff in all roles were highly motivated and offered care and support that was exceptionally compassionate and kind.” from the report
Respect and involvement
People were involved in care planning and risk management. Their privacy, dignity and independence were central to the way the home worked.
“Respect for privacy and dignity was at the heart of the service's culture and values. This was fully embedded into the service.” from the report
Support to gain independence
People were supported with everyday activities such as cooking, shopping and cleaning. The home also helped people develop new skills.
“People were supported to maintain their independence and engage in activities of daily living such as, cooking, food shopping and cleaning their room.” from the report
Safe medicines management
Inspectors found that people received medicines as prescribed. Staff were trained and their competence was checked.
“Medicines were managed safely at the service. People were receiving their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Good communication and inclusion
Staff could communicate in English, Punjabi and Urdu. People were supported with cultural, religious and communication needs.
“Staff employed at the home were multi lingual and spoke English, Punjabi and Urdu so they could communicate effectively with all the people they were supporting.” from the report
Easy-read information was still being developed
minorThe provider was creating easy-read documents for its services, but this work was not yet complete at the inspection.
“The nominated individual told us the provider was in the process of creating a range of easy read documentation for all their services to use.” from the report
- 01What easy-read information is now available for people who need it?
- 02How would you support my relative's particular mental health needs, including changes in their wellbeing?
- 03How will my relative be involved in planning their care and managing their own risks?
- 04How do you support people to develop independence through cooking, shopping, cleaning or other daily activities?
- 05How would you support my relative's communication, cultural or religious preferences?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the home itself. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 August 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, March 2017
Sheldon House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring support and improvements since the previous inspection.
Inspectors visited without warning on 27 February 2017. They spoke with three residents, one relative and staff, observed daily life, and checked care, staff and management records. Five people were living at the home.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. Residents said they felt safe and liked the staff. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines systems, good training, respectful care, personalised support and regular checks on quality.
The previous inspection in December 2015 rated the service Requires Improvement and found breaches in three regulations. This inspection found enough improvement to meet those requirements. Some smaller issues were identified and the provider said these were corrected shortly after the visit.
Residents felt safe
Residents told inspectors they felt safe, and staffing levels were maintained. Recruitment checks and risk assessments supported people's safety.
“People expressed no fears or concerns for their safety and told us they felt safe.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew residents well and supported their dignity, privacy, choices and independence.
“We saw in all cases people were cared for by staff that were kind, patient and respectful.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's histories, preferences, interests and support needs. Residents were involved in agreeing their plans.
“The plans contained information on people's life history, preferences and interests so these could be supported.” from the report
Good communication
Multilingual staff helped residents who did not speak English as a first language. Staff were also described as supportive and approachable.
“Staff employed at the home were multi lingual and spoke English, Punjabi and Urdu” from the report
Quality checks
The home used audits, provider visits, staff meetings and feedback to check and improve its service.
“There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided.” from the report
Medicines policy needed more detail
needs fixingThe medicines policy did not initially explain some procedures, including gloves, medicines for home leave and allergies. The provider said the guidance was updated the day after the inspection.
“We found the medicines policy did not contain specific detail on aspects of medicines management and administration.” from the report
Information was not initially translated
minorThe complaints procedure was available in Urdu, but the service user guide was initially available only in English. The provider said an Urdu guide was produced the day after the inspection.
“We found the service user guide was only available in English.” from the report
Policies were not dated
minorInspectors could not tell from the policies when they had been reviewed. Staff were expected to read them, and the service said it would ensure they were dated.
“The policies seen had not been dated so it was not possible to determine if they had been reviewed to keep them up to date.” from the report
- 01How do you keep the medicines policy and guidance up to date, especially for home leave, allergies and use of gloves?
- 02Can we see the service user information in the language that the person using the home understands?
- 03How often are the home's policies reviewed and dated?
- 04How will you make sure all staff keep their training current, including diabetes awareness?
- 05What activities, trips and learning opportunities would be available for the person we are considering?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service and covered all five CQC questions, with checks of residents' views, observations and selected care, staff and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 March 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 Sheldon House
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- August 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 November 2012.
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
90 live-in carers within about an hour of Sheffield
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 £1,020 to £1,270 a week. 76 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Beatrice was a talent dementia carer whose professionalism and dedication allowed mums wishes to remain in her own her come true.”
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.