CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Cranlea
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. They found suitable PPE, testing arrangements, social distancing, hygiene practices and an up-to-date infection prevention and control policy.
- 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
Rated Good overall; a targeted inspection found strong infection prevention and control arrangements, but Safe was inspected without a rating.
Inspectors visited the home on 29 January 2021. The visit was announced and focused on infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
The home had enough suitable personal protective equipment, stored it hygienically, and had separate areas for staff to put it on, remove it and dispose of it. Staff did not work across different care homes and followed social distancing and PPE guidance.
Inspectors were assured about visitor safety, admissions, testing, PPE use, hygiene, outbreak management and the infection control policy. The service was rated Good overall, but this inspection did not give a rating for Safe.
PPE and hygiene
The home had enough suitable PPE and stored it safely. Staff had separate areas for putting on, removing and disposing of PPE.
“The home had sufficient supplies of appropriate PPE which was stored hygienically and kept safe.” from the report
Staff infection control training
All staff, including catering and housekeeping staff, had training in infection prevention and control, including PPE and hand hygiene.
“All staff, including catering and housekeeping staff had undertaken training in infection prevention and control.” from the report
Managing COVID-19 risks
Staff understood how to support people who had tested positive or had symptoms. Staff did not work across care homes and followed social distancing and PPE guidance.
“Staff demonstrated a good knowledge of how to safely support people that had tested positive or were showing symptoms of COVID-19.” from the report
Monitoring safety
Senior staff described systems for checking that the home was providing safe care.
“The senior staff explained the quality systems they had in place to check the service was providing safe care.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are PPE supplies stored and monitored now?
- 02How do you prevent staff from working across different care homes?
- 03What training have all staff completed in infection prevention and control since this inspection?
- 04How do you manage admissions and testing when someone may have COVID-19?
- 05How would you prevent or manage an infection outbreak in the home?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; Safe was inspected but not rated and the report does not assess all areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 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, March 2020
Cranlea was rated Good in all areas; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with mixed views about activities.
This was an unannounced inspection on 10 February 2020. Inspectors reviewed care, medicines and recruitment records, checked the building, observed communal areas, and spoke with people, relatives and staff.
The home supported 37 people with personal or nursing care. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with dignity and respect, and supported by staff who understood their needs. Medicines, risk assessments, staffing and recruitment were managed safely.
Care plans were detailed and person-centred. People were supported with meals, healthcare, communication, activities and choices. The home had a quality monitoring system, and the manager used feedback, audits and learning from incidents to make improvements.
All five areas were rated Good. This means the inspectors found consistently good outcomes and care at the time of the inspection. The overall rating was unchanged from the previous inspection, published on 1 July 2017.
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives were very positive about staff. Inspectors saw staff providing reassurance and emotional support, while respecting privacy and dignity.
“People and relatives we spoke with were very happy with the support they received from staff.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans reflected people's likes, dislikes and support needs. Staff could follow the guidance and involved people and relatives in reviews.
“Care plans were detailed and helped staff to deliver person-centred care.” from the report
Safe medicines and risk management
Medicines were ordered, stored, administered and disposed of appropriately. Risks such as falls and choking were assessed, with guidance for staff to follow.
“Medicines were safely managed. Staff had regular checks to make sure they were competent to administer medicines to people.” from the report
Good oversight
The manager used feedback, audits and learning from incidents to monitor and improve the care provided. Staff, people and relatives were encouraged to speak openly.
“There was a robust quality and assurance system in place to monitor the quality of care provided.” from the report
Mixed views about activities
minorActivities were available and staff worked to reduce social isolation, but not everyone felt there was enough to do. The home should make sure activities meet different people's interests and preferences.
“I would like more activities to join in with. It gets a bit boring in here,” from the report
- 01How do you find out what activities each person enjoys, and how do you respond when someone feels there is not enough to do?
- 02What work remains on the second floor to make it more dementia-friendly?
- 03How often are care plans and risk assessments reviewed with the person and their relatives?
- 04How will you keep families involved in reviews of medicines and healthcare needs?
- 05What feedback have people and relatives recently given, and what changes have you made as a result?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided; all five ratings were Good and unchanged from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 March 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 Cranlea
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2020Goodstayed Good
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2014GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 November 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
36 live-in carers within about an hour of Newcastle upon Tyne
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 £950 to £1,160 a week. 30 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in 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.