CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Swallowfields Care Centre
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe. Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, enough staff, safe recruitment, clean surroundings and safely managed medicines.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and regular supervision. People received support with food, healthcare, communication and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives said staff were kind and respectful. Inspectors saw staff protecting people's privacy and supporting independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans included people's preferences, communication needs and interests. People were supported with activities, relationships and access to the community.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found approachable leadership, supportive staff and regular checks on care, medicines, infection control and safety. People, relatives and staff had opportunities to give feedback.
What inspectors found, February 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care across all five areas, with the rating unchanged since 2017.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 18 December 2019. Two inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff. They reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The inspectors found that people felt safe and were treated kindly. Staff supported people to make choices, develop skills, access healthcare and take part in activities. Medicines, staffing, recruitment and risk management were found to be safe.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspectors found consistently good care and management, but it is not the highest rating. The previous rating was also Good.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives described staff positively. Inspectors saw a calm atmosphere and staff speaking with people in a kind and sensitive way.
“We observed staff constantly engaging people in a kind and sensitive manner.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were involved in everyday decisions and were encouraged to do things for themselves, including cooking, cleaning and laundry.
“We always give choices, with personal care, meal planning, what clothes they want to wear, where they want to visit, who they want to be with.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's likes, dislikes, interests, health needs and communication preferences. Staff could explain how they supported each person.
“People's support plans were person-centred and individualised.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
Medicine records were complete, staff were observed giving medicines safely, and there were enough suitably checked staff to meet people's needs.
“Medicine administration records (MAR) were fully completed and provided staff with descriptions of the medicines people were taking.” from the report
Activities and community life
People chose from activities inside and outside the home. One person had gained confidence to attend a local college.
“One person who previously did not want to leave the home had been supported to build confidence which resulted them attending a local college.” from the report
End of life plans still being updated
minorNo one was receiving end of life care during the inspection. The report says new end of life plans were still going to be updated for every person.
“The registered manager told us new end of life plans were going to be updated for every person.” from the report
- 01How would you support my relative's specific health conditions, communication needs and personal preferences?
- 02What activities and community opportunities would be available, and how would my relative help choose them?
- 03How do you support people to develop independence with daily tasks such as cooking, cleaning and laundry?
- 04What progress has been made with updating everyone's end of life plan?
- 05How will you keep the family informed about health concerns, incidents or changes in care?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 February 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, July 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with DoLS applications still being processed.
This was an unannounced inspection on 26 April 2017. Two inspectors observed care, medicines and lunchtime support. They spoke with people, staff and the manager, and checked care plans, daily records, staff files and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines support, suitable risk plans and good safeguarding knowledge. People received support with food, health appointments, communication, activities and daily choices.
Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness, dignity and respect. Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences. People and relatives spoke positively about the home, and complaints were recorded and resolved.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff with the right skills and knowledge. Staff responded promptly to people's needs.
“People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff with the right skills and knowledge to meet their individual needs.” from the report
Meaningful activities
People were supported with activities linked to their interests, including cooking, swimming, arts and crafts and outings.
“People were supported with a wide range of stimulating activities that met their interests and preferences.” from the report
Good management oversight
The home used audits, feedback and staff observations to check the quality of support and identify improvements.
“People's care and support was regularly monitored so continuous improvement could be made.” from the report
DoLS applications were pending
needs fixingAll people had restrictions on their freedom, and applications for legal authorisation were still being processed by the local authority when inspectors visited. Families should ask about the current status of any application.
“At the time of the inspection applications were still being processed by the local authority.” from the report
Gap in provider checks
minorThe provider's quality system was described as robust, but there had been no unannounced provider inspection for two years. Inspectors said the impact on people was low because other quality checks were in place.
“Although this system was robust an unannounced inspection by the provider had not been carried out for two years.” from the report
- 01What is the current position of each person's DoLS application, and what safeguards are in place while authorisation is pending?
- 02How are staffing levels calculated when a person's support needs change?
- 03How will you support my relative's preferred ways of communicating and their individual interests?
- 04What activities are currently available, and how are people helped to remain independent?
- 05How often does the provider now carry out unannounced checks, and what actions have followed the most recent check?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, covering all five CQC question areas; the previous inspection on 3 March 2013 found no concerns. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 July 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 Swallowfields Care Centre
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 February 2017.
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.