CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Greycliffe Manor
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and staff understood their risks. However, very hot water was not made safe immediately, fire checks were not recorded in the records shown, and some medicines needing extra security lacked a second signature.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained and supported, and people received help with food, drink, mobility and health needs. Some communal areas were unclean, and some carpets and bedding were worn.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff spent time chatting with people and supported them to make choices about their daily lives.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and backgrounds. People were supported with communication, relationships, activities, complaints and end of life care.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Staff and people said the management team was approachable and supportive. However, the home had not had a registered manager since July 2021, and audits had not always identified or acted on problems.
What inspectors found, September 2022
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but health and safety checks were not always followed up promptly.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 22 July 2022. They spoke with six people and six staff, and reviewed care plans, medicines records, staff files and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People told inspectors they felt safe and were happy with their care. Staff were described as kind, supportive and available.
Inspectors found some shortfalls. Very hot water was not made safe straight away, fire checks were not recorded in the records shown, some medicines needing extra security lacked a second signature, and some infection control equipment and areas of the home needed attention. The home confirmed that several issues were fixed after the inspection.
There was no registered manager in post. CQC made recommendations about following up health and safety audits, medicines records and infection control. No regulation was recorded as breached.
Kind and respectful staff
People described staff as caring. Inspectors saw staff spending time with people, chatting and offering comfort and reassurance.
“People said; "Staff are very caring" and "It's lovely here.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people's routines, preferences, personal histories and health needs. Staff received updates so they could respond to changes.
“Care plans were person centred and detailed people's likes and dislikes and how best to deliver care and support.” from the report
Good staffing and training
Inspectors found enough staff on duty. Recruitment checks, induction, supervision and training were in place.
“There were sufficient numbers of staff employed and on duty to meet people's assessed needs.” from the report
Support with health and food
Staff worked with health professionals and monitored people's health, nutrition, hydration and skin care. Special diets were provided and people helped plan menus.
“People were supported to maintain good health and were referred to appropriate health professionals as required.” from the report
Hot water and safety checks
seriousAudits recorded extremely hot water, but it was not adjusted immediately. The laundry room door was also unlocked and fire checks were not recorded in the records shown to inspectors. The home said these issues were resolved afterwards.
“However, when identified in checks extremely hot water temperatures were not adjusted immediately to help keep people safe from harm and to protect them from the risk of scalding.” from the report
Medicines records
seriousMedicines needing extra security were not consistently checked and signed by two staff in the correct record. The home said the checks had been recorded elsewhere.
“There was no second signature to evidence this had occurred.” from the report
Infection control equipment
seriousDuring a COVID-19 outbreak, one used PPE bin was overflowing and another had a broken lid. The home said the broken bin was replaced after the inspection.
“We found one bin overflowing with used PPE and without a lid on.” from the report
Cleanliness and worn furnishings
needs fixingSome communal bathrooms and toilets were not clean. Some carpets, sheets and quilt covers were stained, worn or faded. The home described a renovation programme.
“We also found areas of the home to be unclean and this included communal bathrooms and toilets and some carpets stained and worn.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThere had been no registered manager since July 2021. The management team supported the inspection and an acting manager provided information afterwards.
“At the time of this inspection the service had not had a registered manager since July 2021.” from the report
- 01Who is currently responsible for the home while there is no registered manager, and when is a registered manager expected to be in post?
- 02How are hot water temperatures now checked, and what happens immediately if a tap is found to be too hot?
- 03How are medicines needing extra security checked and recorded by two staff now?
- 04Where are fire safety checks recorded, and can families see evidence that they are being completed regularly?
- 05What work has been completed on cleaning, carpets, bedding and PPE bins since the inspection?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control; a previous focused inspection in April 2021 was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 September 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, May 2021
Targeted inspection; the overall rating remained Good, but inspectors found gaps in mask fitting and staff risk assessments.
This was an unannounced targeted inspection on 9 April 2021. Inspectors looked at specific concerns about falls, nutrition, skin care, sepsis training, medicines, hot water and building security. They also checked infection control.
Inspectors found no evidence that people were at risk of harm from these concerns. Risks linked to falls, skin damage, food and drink were assessed and managed. Staffing levels were reviewed as people's needs changed, and staff responded promptly to call bells.
The home had experienced a COVID-19 outbreak and had worked with health and care agencies. Inspectors found some staff were wearing poorly fitting masks and staff risk assessments had not been completed. Action was taken immediately. This targeted inspection did not give new ratings, so the previous overall rating of Good remained unchanged.
Managing care risks
People at risk of falls or skin damage had assessments and care plans. Food and drink needs were monitored, and outside health professionals were contacted when needed.
“People's dietary and hydration needs were met. People's weight was monitored; care plans and risk assessments were in place and action was taken when concerns were identified” from the report
Responsive staffing
Staffing levels were linked to people's changing needs. Inspectors saw staff supporting people without rushing, and call bells were answered promptly.
“Staff were observed to support people in an unhurried manner and call bells were answered promptly.” from the report
Learning from the outbreak
The home completed an independent review after its COVID-19 outbreak. It made changes to PPE areas and checks, and provided pastoral support to staff.
“The provider carried out an independent review to help identify learning from a COVID-19 outbreak.” from the report
Working with health services
The home worked with health and care agencies during the outbreak. Inspectors were told that advice was acted on and communication was effective.
“The community nurse told us the service worked in partnership; there was effective communication and advice was always acted upon.” from the report
Poorly fitting masks
needs fixingThree staff members were seen wearing masks that did not fit properly. The manager acted immediately, and a later visit found staff wearing PPE in line with guidance.
“We observed three members of staff who's face masks did not fit properly, this was despite a variety of sizes being available to staff.” from the report
Missing staff risk assessments
needs fixingIndividual risk assessments had not been completed for staff, including risks for staff from a BAME background. The manager said immediate action would be taken.
“individual risk assessments for staff had not been completed for staff in order to identify ongoing risk and/or for staff from a BAME background.” from the report
Recent medicines error
needs fixingThe home had introduced an electronic medicines system and trained staff, but training was being strengthened after a recent medicines error.
“However, in response to a recent medicine error the training was being strengthened to help improve staffs understanding.” from the report
- 01What checks now make sure every staff member has a correctly fitting mask?
- 02Have individual staff risk assessments now been completed, including for staff from a BAME background?
- 03What was learned from the recent medicines error, and how is staff competence now checked?
- 04How are staffing levels adjusted when a person's care needs change?
- 05What changes were made after the COVID-19 outbreak and its independent review?
This was a targeted inspection of specific parts of Safe and Well-led, including infection control; it did not assess the whole of either key question, and the other key questions were not reviewed. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 May 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 Greycliffe Manor
3 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- September 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not ratedWell-led: Inspected but not rated
- October 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 November 2019.
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.