Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a nursing home

What the CQC found at Darnall Grange

Goodpublished 13 July 2026, 2 months ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, February 2022

Darnall Grange was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.

This was an announced, targeted inspection on 20 January 2022. Inspectors looked at infection prevention and control, and asked about staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.

Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks. They found appropriate use of personal protective equipment, regular cleaning, safe visiting arrangements, testing, social distancing and an up-to-date infection control policy.

The report does not give an overall quality rating. The Safe question was inspected but not rated. The inspection did not assess the other four questions about care quality.

What inspectors praised
  • Infection control layout

    The home had changed its layout to create more space for social distancing in a communal area.

    “the communal area on the first floor had been adapted to create more space to support effective social distancing.” from the report
  • PPE and staff training

    Staff had training on infection safety and PPE, and inspectors saw staff using PPE correctly. The home had enough PPE available.

    “Staff had received training about how to keep people safe from the risk of infection and how to use PPE correctly.” from the report
  • Cleaning

    Inspectors found the premises clean and saw enhanced cleaning of frequently touched surfaces.

    “The premises were clean. Staff completed enhanced cleaning of frequently touched surfaces.” from the report
  • Visiting arrangements

    The home had arrangements for visits to restart safely, with visits booked in advance and visitors asked to test and wear PPE.

    “Visits were pre-booked to ensure they were staggered and the number of visitors to the home was manageable at all times.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.

Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How are you managing staffing pressures linked to COVID-19 now?
  2. 02How do you prevent and manage infection outbreaks, and when was the infection control policy last updated?
  3. 03What PPE and testing arrangements are currently in place for staff, visitors and people admitted to the home?
  4. 04How are visits arranged now, and what infection control requirements do visitors need to follow?
  5. 05How do you check that staff and visiting professionals meet the COVID-19 vaccination requirements or have an exemption?

This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not assess the other four quality questions and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 February 2022 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.

An earlier report, explained

What inspectors found, November 2018

Darnall Grange was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care and clear improvements since the previous Requires Improvement rating.

This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 11 October 2018. Inspectors looked around the home, spoke with people living there, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care plans, medicines, recruitment files, training records and management checks.

All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff at the visit, safer recruitment checks, trained staff, safe medicines management, better care records and good support with food, activities and healthcare.

The previous inspection in September 2017 found weaknesses in records, end of life care information and management checks. The home had improved these areas and the previous breach of Regulation 17 had been addressed. Some smaller issues still needed attention, including an upstairs kitchenette in poor repair and some planned dementia-friendly changes that were not yet complete.

What inspectors praised
  • Improved records and oversight

    Care plans and risk assessments had improved, including information about end of life care. New audits helped identify and fix shortfalls more quickly.

    “A more robust system had been implemented to assess if the home was operating as planned.” from the report
  • Kind and respectful care

    Inspectors saw staff communicate warmly, respect privacy and dignity, and encourage people to make choices and remain independent.

    “People were cared for by staff who were compassionate, caring and responsive to their needs and preferences.” from the report
  • Safe staffing and medicines

    There were enough staff at the inspection, call bells were answered promptly and medicines were administered by trained staff.

    “There was enough staff on duty to meet the needs of people living at the home at the time of our visit.” from the report
  • Food and activities

    People were offered varied meals, help to eat when needed and choices about food. Staff also provided activities and stimulation when the activities coordinator was absent.

    “People had access to a varied programme of social activities and stimulation, which everyone they said they enjoyed.” from the report
  • Better care planning

    Care records included people's needs, preferences, abilities and risks. Records showed that care was reviewed and delivered as planned.

    “Care files sampled at this inspection demonstrated care records were more detailed and person centred.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Kitchenette needed repair

    needs fixing

    The upstairs kitchenette was in poor repair and was identified as an infection control risk. The home said refurbishment was planned and new fittings had been bought.

    “The upstairs kitchenette was in poor repair, so presented an infection control risk.” from the report
  • Agency staff training

    needs fixing

    Two relatives felt some agency staff were not trained to the same standard as permanent staff. Management said agency staff completed essential training and received an induction.

    “However, two relatives said they felt some agency staff were not trained to the same standard as the permanent staff.” from the report
  • More detail for PRN medicines

    minor

    Guidance for medicines given only when needed had improved, but inspectors said it would benefit from extra information for staff.

    “We discussed with the registered manager the benefits of adding additional information to them, to make them more informative to staff.” from the report
  • Dementia-friendly changes unfinished

    minor

    Some planned improvements to the environment for people living with dementia had not yet been completed, including quiet areas at the ends of corridors.

    “Some of the planned changes highlighted last year were still awaiting completion, such as the development of the quiet areas at the end of each corridor.” from the report
  • Personal grooming concern

    minor

    One relative said their family member had not had a shave that day and felt they should have. Managers said they would address this.

    “However, one relative said their family member had not had a shave that day, and felt they should have.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01Has the upstairs kitchenette now been refurbished, and what infection control checks were completed afterwards?
  2. 02How do you check that agency staff have the same essential training and understanding as permanent staff?
  3. 03What extra information is now included in PRN medicine protocols?
  4. 04Have the planned quiet areas and other dementia-friendly improvements now been completed?
  5. 05How do you check that people's personal grooming preferences and needs are recorded and followed each day?

This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, including the areas that had been rated Requires Improvement at the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Darnall Grange

5 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.

  1. February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent rating
    Safe: Inspected but not rated

    Read what inspectors found at Darnall Grange →

  2. November 2018Goodup from Requires improvement
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Darnall Grange →

  3. March 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvement
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. September 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvement
    Safe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. November 2015Requires improvementstayed Requires improvement
    Safe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  6. February 2015Requires improvement
    Safe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  7. March 2014

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  8. May 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  9. August 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  10. February 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  11. February 2012

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  12. September 2011

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  13. January 2011

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 20 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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

90 live-in carers within about an hour of Sheffield

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 £1,020 to £1,270 a week. 76 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.”
Claire A., about Carla M.
“Beatrice was a talent dementia carer whose professionalism and dedication allowed mums wishes to remain in her own her come true.”
Alison P., about Beatrice M.
See live-in carers near SheffieldProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.