CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Gresley House Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, October 2023
Gresley House Residential Home is rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe care, but the home's leadership systems still require improvement.
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection on 9 August 2023. Inspectors visited the home, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
They found improvements in risk management, medicines, infection control, staffing and care records. The home was clean and had a homely atmosphere. People were supported in a personal way, with choices about their care, food and activities.
The overall rating is Good. Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive were all rated Good. Well-led was rated Requires Improvement because the improved management systems had only been in place for about six months and needed more time to show they would last.
Improved safety systems
Risk assessments and care records were up to date. Staff followed guidance to keep people safe, including when people were anxious or at risk of skin damage.
“Systems had been established to assess, monitor and mitigate risks to the health, safety and welfare of people using the service.” from the report
Personalised care
Staff knew people well and supported their individual needs, interests, beliefs and preferences.
“People were supported by staff who knew them well and information in their care plans reflected the support we observed.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors observed friendly interactions. People were supported at their own pace, with privacy, dignity and independence respected.
“People were well treated and supported by staff who respected people's individuality and differences.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People could take part in activities they enjoyed and were supported to maintain relationships with visitors.
“Opportunities were available for people to participate in a range of activities.” from the report
New management systems need time to settle
needs fixingThe home's oversight had improved, but the systems had only been in place for six months. Inspectors wanted further assurance that the changes would continue to work.
“More time was required to provide assurance that recent changes to systems were effective and fully embedded.” from the report
- 01How are you checking that the new quality and safety systems remain effective now they have been in place for longer?
- 02What work is still outstanding in the refurbishment programme, and when is it expected to finish?
- 03How do you check that medicine instructions and records remain accurate, especially for as-required medicines?
- 04How are staffing levels maintained across all shifts, and how much agency staff is currently used?
- 05How are people's activities, communication needs and personal preferences recorded and reviewed?
This was an unannounced follow-up inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe, and checking improvements required after the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 October 2023 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, April 2023
Overall rating remains Inadequate and the home remains in special measures; inspectors found serious gaps in risk management and leadership.
This was an unannounced targeted inspection on 06 February 2023. Inspectors checked concerns about safeguarding incidents, whistleblowing allegations and unwitnessed falls. They also looked at infection control.
The home had not made enough improvement since its previous inadequate inspection. Care records were sometimes inaccurate, inconsistent or out of date. Risks were not always identified or managed properly. Staff deployment and support for people who were distressed were also not effective.
Inspectors found some improvements in infection control and the environment. Medicines were managed safely. However, the home remained in breach of regulations about safe care and treatment and quality oversight. The inspection did not reassess the full questions, so the ratings were recorded as inspected but not rated.
Infection control
Inspectors found infection control measures in place. Housekeeping records were detailed and staff were seen using the correct protective equipment.
“All staff were observed wearing the correct personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
Medicines
Medicines records showed that people received their medicines safely and in line with best practice. Guidance was available for medicines given only when needed.
“The information in the medicine records showed people had received their medicines safely and in line with best practice.” from the report
Environmental improvements
The report says improvements had been made to the home's environment.
“Infection control measures and practices had been implemented and improvements had been made to the environment.” from the report
Risks and care records
seriousCare records were not always accurate or current. Inspectors found that information about risks, including choking, did not match the person's support plan.
“Risks were not assessed, monitored or mitigated effectively.” from the report
People left without enough support
seriousInspectors saw people left unsupervised for long periods and found insufficient meaningful support when people were distressed.
“The inspection team observed people left unsupervised for long periods of time and a lack of meaningful interventions when people were distressed.” from the report
Weak leadership and oversight
seriousThe provider's audits and daily checks did not find the problems identified during the inspection. There was no registered manager in post.
“There was no effective leadership, oversight or systems in place to ensure the service was delivering quality care.” from the report
Incident follow-up
needs fixingThe provider could not show that accidents and incidents were always properly investigated or used to improve care.
“The provider failed to evidence robust processes to ensure investigations took place and lessons were learnt following any incident.” from the report
- 01How are you now checking that each person's risk assessments and support plans are accurate and updated after accidents or incidents?
- 02What specific support do staff provide to people who become anxious, agitated or distressed, and how are staff trained in this?
- 03Who is currently responsible for managing the home, and what is the progress towards having a registered manager in post?
- 04How are accidents, falls and safeguarding incidents investigated, recorded and used to prevent similar events?
- 05How do your audits now identify the risks and care record problems found by this inspection?
This was a targeted inspection of specific concerns within Safe and Well-led; it did not assess the full five key questions and did not change the previous inadequate rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 April 2023 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 Gresley House Residential Home
9 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- October 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Gresley House Residential Home →
- April 2023Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Gresley House Residential Home →
- February 2023Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- November 2022Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2019Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2019Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- November 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- May 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2016Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- June 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 June 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
62 live-in carers within about an hour of Derbyshire
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 £1,010 to £1,260 a week. 51 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
“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.