CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Bedale Grange Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing and managing infection risks. This included visitor controls, social distancing, testing, protective equipment, cleaning and staff training.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about the home's infection prevention and control measures.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 4 February 2021. It focused on how the home was preventing and controlling coronavirus infections.
Inspectors found good practice. Visitors had to use personal protective equipment, provide testing information and have their temperature checked. Staff supported people's social and emotional wellbeing, including through video calls.
The home had enough protective equipment, regular cleaning, staff training and checks on the safe use of protective equipment. Inspectors were assured about infection control, but the service was not given an overall quality rating.
Visitor safety
Visitors had to follow several safety checks before entering, including using protective equipment, providing testing information and having their temperature checked.
“All essential visitors had to wear appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
Protective equipment
The home had enough protective equipment and separate areas for staff to put it on, remove it and dispose of it safely.
“The home had ample supplies of appropriate PPE which was stored hygienically and kept safe.” from the report
Cleaning and hygiene
Extra cleaning and deep cleaning were being carried out where needed, with records kept by housekeeping staff.
“Additional cleaning of all areas and frequent touch surfaces was in place and being carried out and recorded by housekeeping staff.” from the report
Communication and training
Staff received regular updates about infection control. They completed training and competency checks covering protective equipment and hand hygiene.
“There was a robust communication system in place to ensure staff received consistent updates in relation to infection control policy and practice.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now?
- 02How do you test and monitor staff and visitors for infections?
- 03How often are communal areas and frequently touched surfaces cleaned, and how is this recorded?
- 04How do you support residents to keep in touch with family when visiting is restricted?
- 05What are the home's current CQC ratings for areas not covered by this inspection?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the report does not assess the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 February 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, November 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with improvements since the previous inspection.
Inspectors carried out a comprehensive inspection over four days in October 2018. The first day was unannounced. They spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional, and reviewed care plans, staff records, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, suitable care plans, kind staff and activities that reflected people's interests.
The home had improved since the September 2017 inspection, when it was rated Requires Improvement. Environmental risk checks and quality monitoring were stronger. A small number of issues were identified during this inspection, including out-of-date fire training for two staff and a need to improve bedroom signs.
Safer systems
The home had improved its checks on environmental risks, accidents and incidents since the previous inspection. Medicines, equipment and building safety were also monitored.
“At this inspection, the provider had improved their systems to ensure any environmental risks were identified.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found staff to be caring and patient. They respected privacy and dignity and encouraged people to remain as independent as possible.
“People were supported by caring staff who respected their privacy and dignity.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's individual needs, preferences and communication methods. Staff knew people well and responded when their needs changed.
“People's care plans were person-centred and specific to their individual needs.” from the report
Improved leadership
Quality checks were more effective than at the previous inspection. Audits identified shortfalls and action plans recorded how these would be addressed.
“This showed a positive and more robust approach to monitoring and improving the quality and safety of the service provided.” from the report
Fire training
needs fixingFire training was out of date for two staff members. The manager arranged for this to be completed during the inspection.
“Fire training was out of date for two staff.” from the report
Bedroom signs
minorOne person needed help finding their bedroom. The manager had identified that signs could be improved and was arranging personalised bedroom doors.
“Although we observed people independently navigated around the building, one person needed to be reminded where their bedroom was.” from the report
End of life training
minorThe provider had identified that end of life training still needed to be scheduled. It was being arranged at the time of the inspection.
“For example, they had recognised that end of care life training needed to be scheduled and this was being arranged.” from the report
- 01Has fire training been completed for all staff, and how do you check that it stays up to date?
- 02Have personalised bedroom signs now been put in place for people who may have difficulty finding their rooms?
- 03Has the planned end of life training been completed, and how are people's end of life wishes recorded?
- 04How are staffing levels reviewed when a resident's needs change?
- 05How will you involve my relative and our family in reviewing their care plan?
This was a comprehensive inspection of all five key questions, carried out over four days, with the first day unannounced. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 November 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 Bedale Grange Care Home
3 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2015
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 13 December 2010.
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.