CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Sylvanhurst House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse, risks were assessed and medicines were managed safely. Night staffing had recently increased from one to two staff after concerns about safely supporting a person's behaviour at night.
- Effective?
- Good
- People had detailed assessments, trained staff and regular healthcare support. They were offered choices about food and daily life, and their dietary and health needs were monitored.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with dignity, respect and kindness. People were involved in decisions about their care and could choose how to spend their time.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and gave staff useful information about people's needs, history and preferences. People were supported with hobbies, community activities, complaints and end-of-life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers and staff worked together, sought feedback and used audits to check quality and safety. Accidents, incidents and safeguarding concerns were monitored to support improvement.
What inspectors found, October 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some guidance for staff still needing improvement.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 7 September 2018. One inspector spoke with three people living in the home, observed care, spoke with managers and staff, and checked care plans, staff files, medicine records and other records.
The inspectors found that all five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People appeared comfortable with staff, received their medicines safely, had enough staff support and were involved in choices about their care, food and activities.
The home had systems for safeguarding, complaints, audits and learning from incidents. Inspectors identified some areas to strengthen, including recording staff knowledge about behaviour support and adding more detail to guidance about distraction techniques before using some as-required medicines.
The overall rating stayed Good, as it had at the previous inspection. The report says there was no evidence of serious risks or concerns.
Kind and respectful staff
People appeared comfortable with staff and were treated with dignity and kindness. Staff knew people's personalities, preferences and individual needs.
“Staff used enabling and positive language when talking with or supporting people and treated people with respect and kindness.” from the report
Choice and independence
People were supported to make everyday choices and to remain as independent as possible while managing risks.
“People were encouraged to be as independent as they could be.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely. Inspectors found enough staff on duty, and recruitment checks helped ensure staff were suitable.
“People received their prescribed medicines as and when they should.” from the report
Personalised activities
People were supported to follow their interests, use the community and take part in activities such as art, walking, gardening and karaoke.
“People were supported to follow their interests and hobbies.” from the report
Quality checks and learning
The home used regular checks, meetings, surveys and reviews of incidents to monitor care and identify improvements.
“There were arrangements in place for checking the quality of the care people received.” from the report
Behaviour support records
needs fixingSome care plans contained only basic information about what staff should do when behaviour became challenging. The manager agreed to find a better way to record staff knowledge for new or agency staff.
“Some basic information was in people's care plans to guide staff on what action they should take when a person's behaviour challenged the service.” from the report
As-required medicine guidance
needs fixingRecords did not explain the distraction techniques staff used before giving some as-required medicines when people became anxious or distressed. The manager agreed to review and add this information.
“Although in these instances staff would use distraction techniques to help diffuse and calm situations before they escalated and PRN was required, these were not detailed in people's records.” from the report
- 01How are behaviour support techniques now recorded so that new or agency staff can follow them consistently?
- 02What information is now included in people's records about distraction techniques before as-required medicines are used?
- 03Are two staff members still provided at night, and how is night-time safety reviewed?
- 04How do you check that staff follow each person's care plan and understand their individual preferences and risks?
- 05How are people's views about activities, food and care recorded and acted on?
This was a comprehensive, unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, and all five ratings were Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 October 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 Sylvanhurst House
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 June 2013.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Croydon
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 £1,230 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Terry has been of invaluable help to our family while working as a part-time live-in carer for our mother for approximately 6 months”
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.