CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Grange-Lea Residential Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, August 2020
Grange-Lea Residential Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control arrangements during the coronavirus pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection. It looked at infection prevention and control measures in response to the coronavirus pandemic. The report gives two inspection dates: 11 August 2020 on the front page and 12 August 2020 in the detailed section.
Inspectors found that staff worked hard to reduce infection risks. The home had infection control champions, used protective equipment correctly, supported people who were shielding or isolating, and had organised visiting arrangements.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, admissions, testing, protective equipment, social distancing, hygiene and possible outbreaks. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Infection control
Staff were described as working very hard to protect people from infection. Four infection control champions supported consistent standards.
“Staff were working extremely hard to ensure people were protected from the risk of infection.” from the report
Support for people at higher risk
People who were shielding or isolating were identified and supported. Some had dedicated staff to reduce infection risks while meeting their needs.
“People at extreme risk and those isolating had been identified and were supported in creative ways” from the report
Visiting arrangements
The home used its garden and booked visits to reduce contact between visitors. Visitors were screened, asked to clean their hands and wear masks.
“Robust systems were in place to support people to have visitors.” from the report
Communication with families
The home used newsletters and discussions to explain its infection control arrangements to people and relatives.
“Regular newsletters and discussions took place to involve people and relatives in keeping each other safe.” from the report
Further development suggested
minorInspectors signposted the provider to resources to develop its approach. The report does not say that this led to a breach or enforcement action.
“We have also signposted the provider to resources to develop their approach.” from the report
- 01How are infection control champions being used now, and how is their work checked?
- 02How are people who are shielding or isolating supported today?
- 03How are visits arranged, screened and managed to reduce infection risks?
- 04How often are staff and residents tested, and what happens after a positive result?
- 05What resources or improvements did the provider develop after CQC signposted them to further guidance?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it was not a full inspection and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 August 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.
What inspectors found, October 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, but medicines storage temperatures were not being checked.
The inspection took place on 29 and 30 August 2017. The first day was unannounced. Inspectors observed care, looked around the home and reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files and quality checks. They spoke with 13 people, five relatives, staff and a visiting healthcare professional.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines administration, detailed care plans and staff who knew people well. People were supported to make choices, stay as independent as possible and take part in activities that mattered to them.
There was one medicines shortfall. The home did not monitor the temperature of the medicines storage area, so inspectors could not confirm that medicines were stored within the correct temperature range. The manager said this would be dealt with immediately. Some people also wanted fresher food or more variety, and new menus were being prepared.
Kind and respectful care
Staff were calm, friendly and unhurried. They asked for consent and protected people's privacy and dignity.
“The atmosphere at the home was calm, relaxed and unhurried.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's routines, preferences and interests in detail. Staff used this information to provide individual care.
“This meant that people received care that was totally individualised, person centred and based on how they wanted to be treated and looked after.” from the report
Good staffing and training
Inspectors found enough staff on duty and a thorough recruitment process. Staff received induction, training, supervision and appraisals.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff to support people safely and staffing levels were adjusted to meet people's changing needs and wishes.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used audits, feedback and development plans to review care and make improvements.
“The quality of the service was monitored and the service was keen to further improve the care and support people received.” from the report
Medicines storage temperature
needs fixingThe home did not monitor the temperature of the medicines storage area. Inspectors could not confirm that medicines were kept within the correct temperature range, and the manager said this would be addressed immediately.
“However, we found the provider did not monitor the temperature of the medicines storage area.” from the report
Menu variety
minorMost people liked the food, but one person wanted more fresh food and another wanted more variety. The home was preparing new menus in response to feedback.
“Never very exciting and never a surprise, you know what's coming as the menu just repeats itself.” from the report
- 01What action was taken after inspectors found that the medicines storage area temperature was not being monitored?
- 02How are medicines storage temperatures checked and recorded now?
- 03Were the new menus introduced, and how do you respond when someone wants more variety or different food?
- 04How are care plans reviewed when a person's needs or preferences change?
- 05How are people who prefer to stay in their rooms supported to take part in activities?
This was an inspection of the overall quality of the home and covered all five CQC areas, using observations, discussions and records. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 October 2017 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 Grange-Lea Residential Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- August 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Grange-Lea Residential Care Home →
- October 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Grange-Lea Residential Care Home →
- August 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 August 2016.
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
21 live-in carers within about an hour of Torbay
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 £1,400 a week. 17 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
“She was not phased by anything, she was adaptable, kind & gave us complete confidence to go away & not worry about a thing!”
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.