CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Silvermere Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Silvermere Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control and support during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The CQC visited on 25 February 2021. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the COVID-19 pandemic. It looked at infection prevention and control, especially after an outbreak.
Inspectors found the home was clean and hygienic. Staff had access to personal protective equipment, followed infection control procedures and took part in COVID-19 testing and training. The home had plans for managing outbreaks and staff absence.
People said staff had supported them well when family visits were restricted. The home provided activities and one-to-one support during isolation, and had reopened communal areas carefully. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Support during restrictions
People said staff supported them well when family visits were not possible. Staff also provided one-to-one support and activities during room isolation.
“People told us staff had supported them well during the pandemic.” from the report
Infection control
The home was clean and had extra cleaning arrangements for frequently touched areas. Staff had infection control training and used PPE safely.
“The home was clean and hygienic. Additional cleaning schedules had been implemented, including of frequently touched areas.” from the report
Testing and outbreak planning
Staff were tested regularly and the home had a contingency plan for risks such as increased staff absence. Infection control audits had also been carried out.
“The provider had a contingency plan. which addressed risks related to COVID-19, such as an increase in staff absence.” from the report
Maintaining activities and visits
Activities had restarted with smaller groups and extra sessions. The home had also installed a garden visiting pod for safer future visits.
“Activities co-ordinators provided additional sessions so all those who wished to take part could do so.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have your infection prevention and control arrangements changed since the February 2021 inspection?
- 02How do you manage visiting during an outbreak or other period when indoor visits are restricted?
- 03How often are agency staff tested and screened before working at the home?
- 04How do you support residents with activities and personal contact if they need to isolate in their rooms?
- 05What arrangements are in place for residents who need to see a GP face-to-face?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the other four areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 March 2021 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 2019
Silvermere Care Home was rated Good overall, with exceptionally responsive care but some lunchtime delays and paperwork errors about people's decision-making.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 19 October 2018. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff, observed care and mealtimes, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. It was rated Outstanding for Responsive. Inspectors found people were safe, treated kindly, supported with their health and nutrition, and given personalised care and a wide range of activities.
There were some shortfalls. Some mental capacity and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards paperwork had been completed incorrectly, although this did not result in inappropriate applications being made and the manager acted promptly. Some people also waited a long time for lunch because of how the service was organised.
Personalised care
Care plans reflected people's individual needs and were updated when those needs changed. Staff involved people and relatives in planning care.
“People received highly personalised care that was responsive to their changing needs.” from the report
Activities and community links
People had a broad programme of activities, outings and opportunities to meet local community groups. Staff also spent time with people who could not take part in group activities.
“People had access to an excellent range of activities and outings and the home had vehicles available to ensure people were able to access the wider community.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives said staff were caring, respectful and attentive. Staff supported dignity, personal choices and independence.
“People told us staff were kind and caring. They said staff treated them with respect and maintained their dignity when providing their care.” from the report
Open management
The management team was accessible and used feedback from people and relatives to make changes. Regular audits and meetings helped monitor the service.
“There were effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the service.” from the report
Lunchtime delays
needs fixingSome people had to wait a long time for meals because staff were not deployed effectively at lunchtime. Extra staff were put in place during the inspection and the manager said this would continue.
“Although people were safe and their care needs were met promptly, staff could have been deployed more effectively at lunchtime.” from the report
Decision-making paperwork
needs fixingSome mental capacity assessments were not specific enough, and two DoLS applications were made for people who had capacity to make the decisions concerned. The manager withdrew the inappropriate applications and arranged reviews.
“We found that some documentation relating to mental capacity assessments and DoLS applications had been completed inappropriately.” from the report
- 01How are lunchtime staffing arrangements working now, and how do you check that people do not wait too long for their meals?
- 02How do you make sure mental capacity assessments are specific to each decision?
- 03How do you involve residents and relatives when reviewing capacity assessments or considering a DoLS application?
- 04How will you tailor activities and one-to-one support if my relative cannot join group activities or outings?
- 05How are care plans updated when a person's health, nutrition or mobility needs change?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including the premises and care provided; the previous overall rating was Good in February 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 March 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 Silvermere Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 December 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
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.