CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Granville Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including visitors, testing, protective equipment, hygiene, social distancing and the management of outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection control and noted thoughtful support during COVID-19 restrictions.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 11 March 2021. It looked at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic. Fourteen people were living at the home, which is registered for up to 20 people.
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, arranged testing, followed shielding and social distancing rules, and kept its infection control policy up to date.
Staff supported people creatively during changes and isolation. The home also kept in touch with relatives and prepared for safer indoor visits. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that the home was preventing infections, using protective equipment safely and arranging testing for people and staff.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Support during change
Staff used creative ideas to help reduce people's anxieties when routines and circumstances changed.
“Staff had been creative in supporting people with changes to reduce people's anxieties.” from the report
Support for staff
Staff had regular supervision and team meetings, and could speak with a psychologist through drop-in sessions.
“Staff felt well supported. Regular supervision and small team meetings were held to encourage staff to share any concerns in relation to COVID-19.” from the report
Family communication
The home kept relatives informed and prepared for indoor visits by carrying out practice visits.
“Regular communication had been promoted with relatives. The provider had updated their procedures in line with Government guidelines to allow for indoor visits.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are people and staff tested now, and what risk assessments are used when testing is not appropriate?
- 02How are indoor visits currently arranged and supported safely?
- 03What items and support are available if someone needs to isolate?
- 04How can staff raise concerns and access psychological support?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it was not a comprehensive assessment and the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 April 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 2019
Granville Court was rated Good in all areas; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, with some gaps in cream medicine records.
This was an unannounced, planned inspection on 23 January 2019. Inspectors reviewed care and medicine records, spoke with six relatives and 12 staff, and checked how the home was managed.
The home supported 14 people with profound learning disabilities, against a registration limit of 20. Inspectors found people were safe, received personalised support, and were helped to take part in meaningful activities and community life.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. There were some gaps in recording prescribed creams, and inspectors saw one area where communication during moving and handling could improve. The home said it had acted or was taking action.
Personalised support
Care plans gave staff detailed guidance about people's needs, communication and preferences. Inspectors found support was delivered consistently and in the way people preferred.
“Care plans were extremely detailed and identified people's communication needs.” from the report
Meaningful activities
People were supported to take part in activities, holidays and community life. Staff were described as taking a practical approach to helping people achieve their choices.
“People were supported to live enriched lives and achieve good outcomes.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw warm relationships and respectful personal care. Relatives spoke enthusiastically about the kindness and compassion of staff.
“Family members spoke enthusiastically about how consistently kind and caring staff and managers were.” from the report
Strong management systems
The home had experienced leadership, regular checks and systems for learning from incidents and feedback. Staff were proud to work there.
“Effective systems were in place to check on the quality and safety of the service and improvements were made when required.” from the report
Cream medicine records
needs fixingInspectors found some gaps in the recording of prescribed creams. The registered manager had already identified this and said steps were being taken to improve the records.
“We identified some gaps in the recording of prescribed creams.” from the report
Communication during moving
minorInspectors observed that communication could be improved while some people were being helped to move around the home. The manager addressed this with staff after the inspection.
“This involved communication whilst assisting people to move around the service.” from the report
Size of the home
minorThe home was larger than current best practice guidance for this type of service. Inspectors said the three self-contained bungalows helped reduce the possible negative impact.
“This is larger than the current best practice guidance.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to ensure every prescribed cream is recorded each time it is given?
- 02How do staff communicate with people when helping them to move around the home?
- 03How does the layout of the three bungalows work for the person who may use the service?
- 04How are people's individual choices reflected in their activities, holidays and community life?
- 05How will families be told about feedback, complaints and improvements made by the home?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 March 2019 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 Granville Court
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 May 2015.
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
16 live-in carers within about an hour of East Riding of Yorkshire
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 £1,030 to £1,420 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
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.