CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Gresham Lodge Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm, and staff understood risks and safeguarding procedures. Inspectors noted that topical creams were not always stored safely in people's rooms.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supported, and people received appropriate help with eating, drinking and healthcare. Staff sought consent and followed best-interest processes when people lacked capacity.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, respectful and person-centred. People and families were involved in care planning, and staff supported privacy, dignity and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was tailored to people's needs and communication preferences, and families knew how to raise concerns. Inspectors recommended improving the provision of daily activities to reduce social isolation.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team promoted a caring culture and responded to issues raised during the inspection. Some quality monitoring records were missing and links with the local community were not always used fully.
What inspectors found, July 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, but daily activities and some records needed improvement.
This was an unannounced, planned inspection on 10 March 2020. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and a visiting professional. They observed care and checked care records, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People were described as happy and well supported. Staff were kind, respectful and understood people's needs.
Inspectors found some areas to improve. Daily activities were limited because staff did not always have time to support them. Topical creams were not always stored safely, some care plans lacked detail, and some quality audit records were missing.
Kind and respectful staff
People said staff were kind, caring and friendly. Inspectors saw staff supporting people calmly and respectfully.
“People were happy and felt well supported by staff who were kind, caring and had developed positive relationships with people.” from the report
Safe care
Staff understood safeguarding and individual risks. Medicines were given as prescribed and infection control arrangements were in place.
“People were protected from avoidable harm and abuse.” from the report
Good support and training
Staff received appropriate training and worked with healthcare professionals to meet people's needs. Food and drink support was tailored to individuals.
“Staff were appropriately trained which enabled them to provide effective care.” from the report
Choice and dignity
People were involved in decisions about their care and supported to follow their own routines. Staff respected privacy and encouraged independence.
“Staff maintained people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Topical creams
seriousTopical creams were not always stored safely in people's rooms. The manager said this would be addressed.
“Topical creams were not always stored safely in people's rooms.” from the report
Limited daily activities
needs fixingThere were seasonal events, but limited activities were available each day. Inspectors made a recommendation to improve activities and reduce social isolation.
“However, there were limited activities available for people daily and staff told us they did not always have time to facilitate activities.” from the report
Care plan detail
needs fixingSome positive behaviour plans and care plans did not contain enough detail to guide staff fully. Managers agreed to update them.
“Positive behaviour plans did not always contain enough detail.” from the report
Quality records
needs fixingThe quality assurance system was mostly effective, but some audit information was missing from the records inspectors reviewed.
“We identified areas of audit information which was not present in the records we reviewed.” from the report
- 01What daily activities are now available, and how do you make sure people can take part every day?
- 02How are topical creams stored safely in people's rooms?
- 03What changes have been made to make positive behaviour plans and other care plans more detailed?
- 04Which quality audits were missing, and how do you now check that monitoring records are complete?
- 05How do you make sure staffing is sufficient during busy times?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including care, medicines, staffing, records and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 July 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 2022
Inspected but not rated; Gresham Lodge Care Home had good infection control arrangements during the COVID-19 review.
Inspectors visited on 25 February 2022. This was an announced, targeted inspection looking mainly at infection prevention and control during COVID-19, and at staffing pressures.
They found suitable arrangements for PPE, testing, visiting, social distancing, cleaning and managing possible outbreaks. Staff were following infection control guidance, and people could keep in touch with family and friends.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not provide an overall quality rating or a rated judgement for Safe.
Infection control
The home had supplies of PPE, monitored stock and followed infection prevention guidance. Staff and visitors had access to the required protective equipment.
“The service had an ample supply of PPE and stock levels were monitored by the registered manager.” from the report
Family contact
People were supported to receive visitors safely. Alternative ways to keep in touch were available if there was an outbreak.
“People were supported to have visitors and safe visiting processes were followed in line with national guidance.” from the report
Managing COVID-19 risks
Staff monitored people for symptoms and had processes for responding if symptoms appeared. Risks to people and staff had been assessed.
“Staff monitored people for signs and symptoms of COVID-19, and appropriate processes were in place and followed should anyone display any symptoms of COVID-19.” from the report
Staff vaccination and testing
Staff took part in regular COVID-19 testing and were fully vaccinated. The report says the home was meeting the vaccination requirement in force at the time.
“Staff took part in regular testing for COVID-19 and were fully vaccinated.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection prevention and control arrangements are in place now, and when were they last reviewed?
- 02How would you support visits from family and friends if there were an outbreak?
- 03How do you monitor PPE supplies and make sure staff and visitors use PPE safely?
- 04How do you manage staffing pressures and make sure they do not affect people's care?
- 05How do you test and monitor people and staff for infections?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, with questions about staffing pressures; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 March 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.
Every inspection of Gresham Lodge Care Home
2 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 12 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
32 live-in carers within about an hour of North Lincolnshire
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 £1,300 a week. 29 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“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.”
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
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.