CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Grove Park Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were in place. This included visitor checks, PPE, testing, cleaning, safe admissions and outbreak management.
- 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 as a rated question, although inspectors noted audits, governance arrangements and management support during the pandemic.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Grove Park Care Home had a targeted infection control inspection; inspectors were assured by the measures in place, but the service was not rated.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 4 December 2020. It looked at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home was using personal protective equipment safely, supporting testing, managing admissions, and following shielding and social distancing rules.
They found the home visibly clean, with extra cleaning and infection control equipment. Staff were supported, and people were offered activities and safer ways to see visitors.
This was not a full inspection of the home. The overall service and Safe question were marked 'Inspected but not rated', so this report does not give a Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating.
Safer visiting
Visitors were assessed for risk, given PPE and checked for a temperature before entering. The home also provided window visits and a visiting pod.
“There was a rigorous visitor risk assessment in place and each visitor was provided with a PPE pack and had their temperature checked on entering the building.” from the report
Support for people in isolation
Each suite had a staff member focused on wellbeing and meaningful activities, including for people isolated in their rooms.
“Each suite had their own wellbeing member of staff who ensured people were provided with meaningful occupation including when isolated in their rooms.” from the report
Staff support and staffing
Staff received regular supervision and wellbeing checks. Extra staff had been recruited to help maintain staffing levels if colleagues could not work.
“Staff were well supported through the pandemic by the management team, with regular supervision and checks on their well-being.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was visibly clean and had extra cleaning arrangements and equipment to support infection control.
“The environment was visibly clean and enhanced cleaning schedules were in place.” from the report
Visitor testing policy was still being developed
minorAt the inspection, the policy for testing visitors had not yet been completed because the home was waiting for lateral flow tests and other safety measures.
“The provider was in the process of developing a policy on testing visitors once the lateral flow tests had been delivered and all safety measures had been put in place.” from the report
- 01Has the policy for testing visitors now been completed, and what checks are visitors currently required to follow?
- 02How does the home manage infection outbreaks and keep families informed?
- 03How are meaningful activities provided when a person has to isolate in their room?
- 04What staffing arrangements are used when staff are ill or cannot work?
- 05How often are cleaning, PPE and infection control arrangements checked now?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it was not a full inspection and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 December 2020 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, January 2020
Grove Park Care Home was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some records and response times needing improvement.
Inspectors visited on 18 and 27 November 2019 without warning. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training, accidents, complaints and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good. People said they felt safe and well cared for. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management overall, clean premises, kind staff, personalised care and a varied activities programme.
There were some issues. A pressure-relieving mattress was set incorrectly, some people sometimes waited for call bells at night, and there were gaps or discrepancies in medicines records. These were addressed during the inspection or had improvement work under way.
The home was also rated Good at its previous inspection, published in May 2017. Good means the inspectors found the service met the relevant standards at the time of this inspection, but it does not mean that every part was perfect.
People felt safe
People consistently told inspectors they felt safe. Staff had safeguarding training and knew how to protect people from abuse.
“People were protected from the risks of abuse and felt safe living at the service.” from the report
Clean and maintained home
Inspectors found the home very clean and well maintained. Staff followed cleaning and infection control procedures.
“The home was very clean, and staff completed regular cleaning in accordance with set schedules.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors observed interactions that were attentive, encouraging and supportive.
“Staff treated people with kindness and respect. They understood people's individual needs and preferences.” from the report
Meaningful activities
Activities were based on people's interests and needs. Inspectors saw people enjoying quizzes and reminiscence groups, and the home offered events, trips and individual activities.
“People were supported to lead active and meaningful lives.” from the report
Open management and improvement
Management used audits, feedback and learning from incidents to improve the service. Staff said they were supported and kept informed about improvements.
“Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service and the care provided and actions were taken to continuously improve the service.” from the report
Pressure mattress setting
needs fixingOne person's pressure-relieving mattress was not set correctly for their weight. The manager said mattresses would be checked before use.
“However, a person's pressure relieving mattress was not set correctly for their weight.” from the report
Call bell waiting times
needs fixingSome people said they sometimes waited longer than expected for staff to answer call bells, particularly at night.
“Some people said they occasionally waited longer than expected for staff to answer call bells.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingInspectors found a small number of differences between medicines held and the records. Some protocols for 'when required' medicines were missing, although these issues were addressed during the inspection.
“However, there were some inconsistencies with the records of PRN medicines protocols, as some were not in place.” from the report
Care plan reviews
minorCare plan reviews did not always show how the plan had been checked for effectiveness. The manager said staff were working on this.
“Reviews did not always show how care plans had been evaluated for their effectiveness.” from the report
Diabetes guidance
needs fixingOne diabetes care plan did not explain what staff should do if blood sugar was very low or very high. Inspectors said this was corrected during the inspection.
“One person's care plan on diabetes did not give guidance on the action to take in the event of very low or high blood sugar levels.” from the report
- 01How do you now check and improve response times to call bells, especially at night?
- 02How are medicines stocks, records and 'when required' medicine protocols checked for accuracy?
- 03How do you make sure pressure-relieving mattresses are set correctly before they are used?
- 04How are care plan reviews recorded to show whether the person's care is effective?
- 05How would staff respond if my relative's blood sugar became very low or very high?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, including both the care provided and the care home premises. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 January 2020 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 Grove Park Care Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 April 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Leeds
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 £1,250 a week. 89 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Took his time to learn about me read my care plan and to listen to me. great companionship with lots of laughing.”
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.