CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Greystones
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control procedures were being followed. They found arrangements for PPE, testing, cleaning, visiting, admissions and managing outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not assessed or rated in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not assessed or rated in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not assessed or rated in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This was not assessed or rated in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Greystones: inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured infection prevention and control measures were in place.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 23 March 2021. It looked only at how the home was prepared to prevent and control COVID-19 infections. At the time, 18 people were living there, although the home could support up to 26.
Inspectors found good infection control arrangements. These included testing, personal protective equipment, cleaning, social distancing, safe visiting rules and plans for admissions or hospital returns. They were assured that people were protected from infection.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or a rated judgement for most of the five areas of care.
Keeping families in touch
People were supported to stay in contact with relatives and friends through window visits, telephone calls and video calls. Visiting arrangements were clearly explained and included safety checks.
“People have been supported to maintain contact with their friends and relatives throughout the pandemic.” from the report
Testing and protective equipment
There was regular COVID-19 testing for staff and residents, with extra tests if someone was unwell or had symptoms. Staff used masks and added aprons and gloves for personal care.
“We were assured that the provider was accessing testing for people using the service and staff.” from the report
Clean surroundings
Inspectors found the home clean and tidy. Extra cleaning of frequently touched areas had been added, and managers checked cleaning and PPE practices.
“The home was clean and tidy and extra touch-point cleaning tasks had been added to tasks lists.” from the report
Up-to-date infection procedures
The infection prevention and control policies had been reviewed and updated in line with COVID-19 guidance. Staff had refreshed their training.
“The provider had reviewed their infection prevention and control policies.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What is the current visiting policy, and are visitors still required to book in advance and follow infection control checks?
- 02How often are residents and staff tested now, and what happens if someone has COVID-19 symptoms?
- 03What arrangements are in place if a new resident is admitted or someone returns from hospital?
- 04How are current cleaning, PPE and infection control practices checked?
- 05When was the home last fully assessed for care quality in areas not covered by this targeted inspection?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it did not rate the other four key questions or give an overall service rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 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, October 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and responsive care, with some records and access arrangements needing improvement.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 4 October 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They also reviewed care records, staff files and other documents, and observed care.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was unchanged from the previous inspection. Inspectors found no serious risks or concerns.
People said they felt safe and were positive about the care. Staff were trained, staffing levels were adequate, medicines were generally managed safely, and managers monitored the quality of the service.
There were some shortfalls. Records for creams and ointments were not always complete, some risk assessments were not personalised, some staff files were incomplete, and some drinks and walking aids were not easy to access safely. The home took immediate action on the cream records and had plans to address other issues.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives described staff as kind, welcoming and caring. Inspectors saw staff respecting privacy and dignity.
“People living at the service were relaxed and happy in the care of staff.” from the report
Safe medicines systems
Medicines were stored and administered safely, with regular internal and pharmacy checks. The main exception was inconsistent recording of creams and ointments.
“People received their medicines safely.” from the report
Enough trained staff
Inspectors found adequate staffing, suitable recruitment checks and training for safe and effective care. Agency staff were seldom used, supporting continuity.
“People continued to be supported by adequate staffing levels to meet their individual needs.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records described individual needs and preferences. Staff knew people well and supported their independence, interests and changing needs.
“Staff knew the people that they were caring for well and they understood people's preferences and needs.” from the report
Active management oversight
Managers were visible and approachable. Regular audits, meetings and action plans helped monitor the service and identify improvements.
“Systems were in place to regularly monitor the quality of the service.” from the report
Cream records
needs fixingStaff recorded creams in daily notes but did not always update the topical medicines record. The deputy manager took immediate action during the inspection.
“However, there were gaps in records relating to the application of people's creams and ointments.” from the report
Risk assessments
needs fixingSome risk assessments used the same wording for different people and were not personalised. Managers already had a plan to review them.
“We found that some information in risk assessments was not personalised.” from the report
Access to drinks and walking aids
needs fixingSome people could not easily reach cold drinks. Walking frames were removed when hot drinks were served, which could increase risk and reduce independence.
“Cold drinks were available at all times in the lounge area, although these were difficult for some people to reach independently.” from the report
Incomplete staff files
minorSome staff files were incomplete while the home updated them, although the missing information was available elsewhere in the building.
“This meant that some staff files we looked at were incomplete, although all the information was available within the building.” from the report
More activities wanted
minorActivities were provided, but some people wanted entertainers and organised day trips more often. Staff were asked to review activity times.
“People told us that they would like to have entertainers and organised day trips more often.” from the report
- 01How do you now make sure creams and ointments are recorded on the correct medicines record every time?
- 02Have all risk assessments been reviewed and personalised for each resident?
- 03How do residents keep their walking aids with them when drinks are served?
- 04How can residents reach drinks independently, and what support is provided if they cannot?
- 05What activities, entertainers and organised trips are now available, and how are residents' preferences used to plan them?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five areas and the overall rating; all ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 October 2018 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 Greystones
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- October 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 December 2010.
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
25 live-in carers within about an hour of Bath and North East Somerset
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 £1,320 a week. 20 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She enabled mum to lead a high quality life in her own home until the very end and Lena and her family became close personal friends to me and my family.”
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.