CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Cranmer Scheme
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed, including visitors, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing, cleaning and outbreak procedures.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection controls and safe visiting arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 17 and 18 February 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment and testing safely. They found clear risk assessments, knowledgeable staff and up-to-date infection control policies.
The home had created a sheltered testing area and a visiting room with a screen. People were supported to keep in touch with relatives through visits, technology and other activities. The home was clean, and enhanced cleaning records were available.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or a rated judgement for the wider areas of care.
Safe visiting
The home had made practical changes so relatives could visit more safely, including an outside testing area and a screened visiting room.
“The home had made adaptions to help facilitate safe visiting.” from the report
Contact with relatives
People could keep in touch through drive-through visits, face-to-face visits and technology. The home also provided activities during restrictions.
“People were supported to keep in touch with their relatives through a variety of methods including drive through visits, face to face visits and through the use of technology.” from the report
Risk planning
Inspectors found detailed risk assessments and staff and managers who understood the relevant procedures and guidance.
“Clear and detailed risk assessments were in place supporting the service to follow government guidance to help ensure the safety of people who lived in the service.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was clean and hygienic. Enhanced cleaning was in place and supported by records.
“We found the home to be clean and hygienic and enhanced cleaning was in place which was clearly evidenced through records.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors tested and supported to follow infection control arrangements now?
- 02Are face-to-face visits still available, and what alternatives are offered if visiting is restricted?
- 03How often are infection prevention and control risk assessments reviewed?
- 04How is enhanced cleaning recorded and checked?
- 05How are relatives involved in care reviews and kept informed if restrictions change?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the wider areas of care were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 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, October 2018
Cranmer Scheme was rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, with some medicine recording issues addressed during the inspection.
This was a comprehensive inspection on 3 and 6 August 2018. The first day was unannounced and the second was announced. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, staff and managers, and checked care plans, medicine records, staff files and other records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People told inspectors they felt safe and that staff were kind, helpful and well trained.
Inspectors found enough staff, regular risk reviews, person-centred care plans and support for people's choices, independence, health and communication needs. Medicines were managed safely, but some recording issues were found and addressed with the registered manager.
The rating means the home met the CQC's requirements at this inspection. The report also describes improvements since the previous inspection, including waking night staff, a locked medicines trolley and a system for gathering people's views.
Risk management
Risks were reviewed when people's needs changed. Inspectors found that actions taken after a fall had helped prevent further falls.
“Risk assessments were carried out, regularly reviewed and updated when people's needs changed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff treated people as individuals and respected their choices, privacy and dignity. People were encouraged to make decisions and build their independence.
“Staff were caring and kind. People were treated as individuals and staff ensured people made their own decisions when possible about their care and how they wished to live.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, communication methods, goals and instructions for their individual needs.
“Care plans were person centred and detailed with instructions for staff to follow.” from the report
Listening and improvement
Resident and relative meetings, audits and feedback were used to identify and complete improvements in the home.
“Audits were carried out to monitor the quality of care being provided and meetings took place with people and their relatives to gather feedback on the service being provided.” from the report
Medicine records
needs fixingInspectors found some recording issues in medicine records. These were discussed with and addressed by the registered manager, but families should ask what checks are now in place.
“Medicines were managed safely however we did find some recording issues which we addressed with the registered manager.” from the report
- 01What medicine recording issues were found, and what changes were made to prevent them happening again?
- 02How will you record and review my relative's communication method, preferences and personal goals?
- 03How are staffing levels adjusted if residents' needs change, including support needed overnight?
- 04How are residents and relatives involved in care reviews and decisions about activities or the home?
- 05How would you support my relative with health appointments, nutrition and any specific health conditions?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the first day unannounced and the second day announced. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 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 Cranmer Scheme
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 January 2011.
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 Leeds
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 £1,250 a week. 89 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Took his time to learn about me read my care plan and to listen to me. great companionship with lots of laughing.”
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.