CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Shottermill House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, August 2020
Shottermill House was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements during a targeted visit.
The inspection took place on 20 August 2020 and was announced. It was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found good practice in visiting arrangements, cleaning, use of space and support for keeping in touch with relatives. Visitors booked appointments, wore face masks, had temperature checks and completed health questionnaires.
The home had arrangements for isolation, separate staff working areas, extra housekeeping staff and a detailed cleaning schedule. Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, supported testing and could prevent or manage infection outbreaks.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or full ratings for all five areas of care.
Careful visiting arrangements
Visits were booked and risk assessed. Visitors wore face masks, had temperature checks and completed a health questionnaire.
“Visiting was by appointment and there were different arrangements in place, to allow for individual preferences and weather conditions.” from the report
Clean environment
The home had extra housekeeping staff and a robust cleaning schedule. Communal areas had been changed to give people more space.
“The service was clean. Additional housekeeping staff had been employed and a robust cleaning schedule was maintained.” from the report
Isolation and social distancing
The layout allowed people to be isolated when needed. Staff worked on separate floors, and the home followed shielding and social distancing rules.
“The layout of the service had allowed for isolation when needed and staff were working on separate floors.” from the report
Support to stay in touch
Staff helped a resident contact a relative overseas through video calls and emails when visiting was not possible.
“Staff had supported contact with video calls and emails.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What are the current arrangements for visiting, including appointments, masks, temperature checks and health questionnaires?
- 02How does the home now manage isolation and staff working arrangements if someone has an infection?
- 03How often are communal areas and other parts of the home cleaned, and is the cleaning schedule still in place?
- 04How does the home provide protective equipment and testing for residents and staff?
- 05What support is available for residents who cannot see relatives in person?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not provide ratings for the other four questions or an overall quality rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 August 2020 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, November 2019
Shottermill House was rated Good overall, with kind and personalised care, but inspectors recommended improvements to medicines records, mealtimes and the dementia-friendly environment.
This was an unannounced inspection. One inspector and an Expert by Experience spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a visiting district nurse. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management documents.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people were safe, treated kindly and supported to make choices. Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences, and activities were available.
There were some areas to improve. Medicines stock balances were not always recorded accurately. Mealtimes were sometimes task-focused rather than person-centred. Inspectors also recommended improvements to signs, colours and décor to make the home more dementia friendly.
The home had no registered manager at the time, but interim arrangements were considered suitable and a new manager was due to start in December 2019. The overall Good rating was unchanged from the previous inspection.
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's routines, preferences and the way they wanted support. Families were invited to take part in care reviews.
“People received personalised care that reflected their needs and preferences.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives described staff as kind and approachable. Inspectors saw staff using eye contact and thoughtful interactions.
“We observed thoughtful and tactile interactions between staff and people.” from the report
Safety arrangements
Risks were assessed, emergency evacuation plans were in place and the premises were checked. Staff understood safeguarding and infection control responsibilities.
“Potential risks to people were assessed to ensure that guidance was in place to mitigate the chance of the risk occurring.” from the report
Activities and relationships
The home offered group and one-to-one activities, trips and visits from volunteers. Relatives were encouraged to visit.
“People were able to partake in regular activities including quizzes, religious tv programmes, skittles, bowls and the use of the home's hairdresser.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingStock balance checks were not carried out regularly, and remaining medicine balances were not always carried forward or recorded accurately. Inspectors recommended that the home review current guidance and update its practice.
“Records of people's remaining medicines balance were not always accurately recorded.” from the report
Mealtimes
needs fixingStaff were often focused on completing tasks rather than engaging meaningfully with people during meals. Inspectors recommended a more person-centred approach.
“During mealtimes we observed that staff were often task based and not always engaging in meaningful conversation with people.” from the report
Dementia-friendly environment
minorWhile refurbishment was taking place, inspectors recommended clearer dementia-friendly signs, contrasting wall colours and suitable décor to help people find their way around.
“This included contrasting wall colours, dementia friendly signage and décor to support people to orientate across the home.” from the report
Management continuity
minorThe home did not have a permanent registered manager during the inspection. Interim support was in place and a new manager was due to start in December 2019.
“Although the home was without a registered manager, a new manager had been recruited and was due to start in December 2019.” from the report
- 01Have the medicines stock balance checks been updated, and how are remaining medicines now checked and recorded?
- 02What changes have been made to make mealtimes more person-centred?
- 03What improvements have been made to signs, wall colours and décor for people living with dementia?
- 04Did the new manager start in December 2019, and who is currently responsible for the home?
- 05Has an additional staff member been added to support morning personal care?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including the premises and care provided; the previous overall rating and all five question ratings were Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 November 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.
Every inspection of Shottermill House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 December 2016.
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.