CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Astley Grange
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control, with a minor issue about secure hand sanitiser access.
The inspection took place on 10 March 2021 and was announced. It was a targeted visit during the coronavirus pandemic, focused on infection prevention and control. At the time, 28 people lived in the home, which can care for up to 30 people.
Inspectors found good arrangements for visitor checks, hand hygiene, PPE, cleaning, social distancing, testing and managing infection risks. They said staff worked with health and social care colleagues and that the home met good infection prevention and control guidelines.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give a full overall rating or ratings for all five areas of care. Inspectors asked the provider to arrange secure hand sanitiser stations for staff, and were told these had been installed shortly after the inspection.
Visitor infection checks
Visitors were checked for symptoms and possible contact with someone who had symptoms or tested positive. Guidance and PPE were available on arrival.
“The service has robust checks in place for visitors on whether they had any COVID-19 symptoms or had tested positive.” from the report
Clean and organised home
Inspectors found a planned cleaning system and said the domestic team worked effectively to keep the home clean and tidy.
“The service had a robust cleaning schedule; the domestic team were organised and worked effectively to ensure the home was clean and tidy.” from the report
Risk management and staff training
Risk assessments explained how staff could reduce the spread of COVID-19. Staff had training in infection control and PPE use.
“Robust risk assessments were completed, making it clear how staff could reduce the risk of transmission of COVID-19.” from the report
Hand sanitiser access
needs fixingHand sanitiser stations were not being used during the visit because of concerns about residents reaching them unsafely. Inspectors asked the provider to find a secure arrangement, and were told stations had been installed shortly afterwards.
“We asked the provider to speak with the local authority's infection control team to implement a secure way of making sanitiser stations available to staff.” from the report
- 01How are the secure hand sanitiser stations being used now, and how do you keep them safe for residents?
- 02How do you currently check visitors for COVID-19 symptoms or recent contact with someone who was symptomatic or tested positive?
- 03What infection control and PPE training have staff completed recently?
- 04How are residents and staff currently tested for infections?
- 05How do you manage new admissions and possible infection outbreaks?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 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, August 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
This was an unannounced inspection on 11 July 2018. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, a relative, staff, a visiting professional and managers. They observed care and checked care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, clean surroundings, suitable food and trained staff. They also saw kind interactions, individual care plans, support for independence and a complaints process.
The previous inspection in November 2017 had found four breaches and rated the home Requires Improvement. At this inspection, inspectors found the identified problems had been addressed and there were no breaches.
Improvement since the last inspection
The home had acted on the problems found at the previous inspection. Inspectors found no breaches during this visit.
“At this inspection the service had improved and there were no breaches.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines records checked for eight people were complete. Staff were trained, medicines were securely stored and controlled medicines were properly checked.
“We looked at eight medicines administration records (MARs) and found they had been completed accurately.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff being kind, attentive and professional. Care plans recorded people's communication needs, preferences and choices.
“We observed staff during the inspection. We saw staff were kind, attentive and professional with good humoured exchanges heard with people and staff laughing.” from the report
Individual care and independence
Care plans explained what people could do for themselves and what support they needed. People were encouraged to remain independent where possible.
“People were encouraged to perform the tasks they could manage to remain independent where they could.” from the report
Open management
People and staff said managers were approachable and supportive. The home used audits and action plans to identify and address shortfalls.
“The registered manager undertook many audits to check how the service was performing.” from the report
Activities staffing
minorThe activities coordinator had left unexpectedly. A replacement was waiting for the required checks, so the home said activities would improve when this person started.
“The activities coordinator had left the service unexpectedly and a new member of staff was waiting for the necessary checks before commencing this role.” from the report
Feedback summaries
minorInspectors found the surveys were positive, but said it was difficult to produce a clear summary because different topics were covered at different times.
“The surveys we looked at were positive but it was hard to produce a summary because of the frequency and different topics.” from the report
- 01Who currently leads activities, and how do you make sure people receive regular one-to-one support if they do not join group activities?
- 02How do you now collect and summarise feedback from people and relatives?
- 03How do you check that staffing levels remain enough for people's needs, particularly at busy times?
- 04How are medicines records and staff competence checked today?
- 05What changes were made after the previous inspection, and how do you check that these improvements have lasted?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions and the overall rating; inspectors checked selected records rather than every person's care. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 August 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 Astley Grange
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 22 January 2014.
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 Bolton
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 £1,260 a week. 92 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
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.