CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Grangemoor House Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable risk assessments and effective infection control arrangements, although some radiators were rusty and some water temperatures were above guidance.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not rated in this inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not rated in this inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not rated in this inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The provider had quality checks and people and staff felt listened to. Several required notifications had not reached the CQC because of an administration error, but the system had been reviewed and notifications were then being received.
What inspectors found, April 2022
Grangemoor House Nursing Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, well-managed care but noted some rusting radiators and missed CQC notifications.
This was an unannounced inspection on 29 March 2022. One inspector spoke with four people and seven staff, reviewed three care plans, medicines records, recruitment checks, audits and safety documents.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practice, suitable risk assessments and staff training. People were protected from abuse, and the home worked within the Mental Capacity Act.
There were some shortfalls. Several radiators showed rust, which made cleaning harder. Some water temperatures were slightly above guidance, but the manager acted immediately to make them safe. Several notifications had not reached the CQC because of an administration error, and the system was changed.
Enough staff
Inspectors found that there were enough staff to support people safely and promptly.
“People were supported by enough staff to safely and promptly support them.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were given as prescribed by trained staff whose competence had been checked.
“People received their medicines as prescribed by trained and competent staff.” from the report
Risk management
Care risks were assessed and staff understood how to reduce the risk of harm while supporting people's choices.
“Staff members knew the individual risks to people and what to do to safely support them.” from the report
Open management
People and staff said their views were valued and that managers were approachable and supportive.
“People and staff found the management team and provider approachable and supportive.” from the report
Rusting radiators
minorSeveral radiators had started to rust, which made effective cleaning harder. The provider said these were included in a refurbishment plan.
“However, we saw several radiators throughout the building had started to show signs of rust.” from the report
Water temperatures
minorSome water temperatures were slightly above health and safety guidance. The manager acted immediately to return them to a safe level.
“At this inspection we saw some water temperatures were slightly above the health and safety executive's guidance.” from the report
Missed notifications
needs fixingSeveral required notifications had not been received by the CQC because of an administration error. The provider reviewed the system and inspectors confirmed that notifications were then being received as expected.
“We identified the provider had not submitted several notifications to the Care Quality Commission.” from the report
- 01Have all the rusting radiators now been repaired or replaced, and how do you make sure they can be cleaned properly?
- 02How are water temperatures checked now, and what happens if they are above the safe level?
- 03What changes were made to the system for sending notifications to the CQC, and how is this checked?
- 04How do you make sure staffing remains sufficient when there are COVID-19-related staff pressures?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led; the report did not give new ratings for Effective, Caring or Responsive. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 April 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.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control during a recent coronavirus outbreak.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 08 February 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus response.
Inspectors found that the home used zoning to help stop infection spreading. They also found clear information about coronavirus and handwashing, safe admission plans, enough protective equipment, regular testing and a vaccination programme.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not provide an overall quality rating or a full rating across all five areas of care.
Managing outbreaks
The home used zoning during a recent coronavirus outbreak to help prevent infection spreading to other people living there.
“The providers management had used zoning effectively in the home to prevent the spread of infection to others living in the home.” from the report
Clear information
Signs about coronavirus and handwashing were both written and pictorial, helping make the information accessible.
“The signs around the home were varied and informative about COVID-19 and handwashing.” from the report
Protective equipment and testing
Inspectors found enough protective equipment, staff wearing it, regular testing and a vaccination programme.
“There was enough PPE for staff, who were seen wearing PPE at all times.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you continuing to use zoning if someone develops coronavirus or another infection?
- 02How often are staff and residents tested now, and what happens after a positive result?
- 03Are visitors still given clear information about infection risks and the rules they must follow?
- 04How do you make sure protective equipment is available in all areas of the home?
- 05When was the infection prevention and control policy last reviewed?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the report does not give ratings for the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 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.
Every inspection of Grangemoor House Nursing Home
4 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- April 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Grangemoor House Nursing Home →
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Grangemoor House Nursing Home →
- June 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 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 Staffordshire
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 £1,230 a week. 85 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
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.