CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Apley Grange
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, trained staff and safe medicines management. They noted that some safety checks and risk information were not fully documented.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and staff were trained and supported. The home worked with health professionals and supported people's nutrition, hydration and healthcare needs.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. They supported people's choices, independence, communication needs, relationships and religious or cultural beliefs.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and activities reflected people's interests. Inspectors noted that some care records did not yet cover all health conditions in enough detail, and end of life wishes were not yet easily accessible.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager was described as responsive to feedback and committed to improvement. Regular audits were used, although inspectors recommended better record keeping about risks and safety checks.
What inspectors found, February 2020
Apley Grange was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some record-keeping needing improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 10 December 2019. Two inspectors and an Expert by Experience spoke with people, a relative and staff. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, kind care, good support from health professionals and activities based on people's interests.
There were some gaps in records. Checks of bed rails and window restrictors were not documented. Some risk assessments and care plans needed more detail. The report recommended improving records about risks and how they were managed.
The previous rating was Good, published on 5 August 2016, and all five ratings remained Good. The provider's legal entity had changed since then.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff on duty. People said care was patient and unrushed, and that staff responded quickly when called.
“Sufficient staff were deployed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and supported their dignity, choices and independence. People were involved in decisions about their care.
“People were treated with dignity and respect and their independence was promoted.” from the report
Personalised activities
Activities and events reflected people's hobbies, interests and faith. People were also supported to maintain relationships and access the wider community.
“Group and one to one activities were planned to encourage social interaction.” from the report
Good leadership
The manager used audits, listened to feedback and had an open approach. Staff described the manager as approachable and well informed about the home.
“The registered manager was very responsive to feedback and clearly committed to continually improve the service.” from the report
Safety checks not recorded
needs fixingChecks of bed safety rails and window opening restrictors had not been documented. The manager agreed to address this.
“We spoke with the registered manager about documenting regular checks of bed safety rails and window opening restrictors to make sure these remained in safe working order.” from the report
Some risk records lacked detail
needs fixingSome risk assessments needed more information about people's health conditions and how risks were managed. The report made a recommendation about improving this documentation.
“We recommend the provider review record keeping in relation to risks and how these are managed.” from the report
Care plans did not cover every condition
needs fixingSome care records did not include planning for all health conditions, including dementia-related conditions. The manager said this work was ongoing.
“People's care records did not always include planning for all their health conditions, such as dementia related conditions.” from the report
End of life wishes less accessible
minorEnd of life wishes had been discussed, but they were held by one member of staff and the manager was working to make them more accessible.
“The registered manager was working to ensure these were more accessible.” from the report
- 01How are checks of bed safety rails and window opening restrictors now recorded?
- 02How do you make sure risk assessments contain enough detail about each person's health conditions?
- 03How are dementia-related conditions covered in each person's care plan?
- 04Where are each person's end of life wishes recorded, and who can access them?
- 05How do you check that care plans are updated when people's needs change?
This was a planned inspection covering all five key questions, the premises and the care provided; it was carried out without notice. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 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.
Every inspection of Apley Grange
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- February 2020Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 December 2018.
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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of North Yorkshire
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 £1,010 to £1,290 a week. 27 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
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.