CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Hall Grange
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home had effective infection prevention and control arrangements. This included visitor screening, testing, use of protective equipment, hygiene measures and plans for infection outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, December 2020
Hall Grange was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and safe arrangements for family contact during the pandemic.
The inspection took place on 10 November 2020 as part of a CQC thematic review of infection control in care homes. It was announced in advance and focused on whether the home was meeting infection prevention and control requirements.
Inspectors were assured that the home screened visitors, used protective equipment safely, followed social distancing and shielding rules, arranged testing, and had plans for managing outbreaks. Staff had infection control training and worked in set units to reduce the spread of infection.
The home supported contact with families through garden visits, window visits, video calls and telephone calls. Essential Family Carers could visit inside in some circumstances. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not provide an overall quality rating or ratings for most areas of care.
Infection control training
Staff had been trained in infection prevention and control and in using personal protective equipment. Inspectors observed staff following the current guidance during the visit.
“All staff had been trained in infection prevention and control (IPC) and the use of personal protective equipment (PPE).” from the report
Visitor safety
Visitors were screened for infection symptoms and given safety information. The home also tested people living there, staff and Essential Family Carers in line with guidance.
“Staff screened all visitors to the service for symptoms of infection and gave them information about the safety procedures they should follow” from the report
Family contact
The home helped people keep in touch with relatives through garden and window visits, telephone calls, video calls and regular updates.
“People were in regular contact with their families.” from the report
Checks and outbreak planning
The home had infection control leads, regular checks and an up-to-date policy. Inspectors found that concerns from checks and audits were acted on immediately.
“Any concerns found during the registered manager's checks and IPC audits were acted on immediately.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What infection control and testing arrangements are in place now?
- 02How can relatives visit, and are garden, window or indoor visits available?
- 03How are people with dementia supported if restrictions affect them?
- 04How are people receiving end of life care supported to see their chosen family members?
- 05How does the home act on concerns found through infection control checks and audits?
This was an announced thematic inspection focused on infection prevention and control; the service was inspected but not rated and the report does not give ratings for the other areas of care. This explanation was written from the published report of 3 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
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with all five areas rated Good.
Inspectors visited over two days in September 2019. The first day was unannounced. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff, observed care, checked care and medicines records, and looked around the building.
They found that people were safe and received the care and medicines they needed. Staff were trained, recruitment checks were completed, and the home was clean and well maintained. Care plans were personalised and updated when people's needs changed.
People described staff as kind, respectful and attentive. There were daily activities, support for keeping in touch with relatives, and opportunities to make choices. The home had systems to listen to feedback, deal with complaints and monitor the quality of care.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Its previous rating was also Good, published on 24 October 2018.
Personalised care
Care plans contained information about people's needs, abilities, preferences and backgrounds. They were reviewed regularly and updated when people's circumstances changed.
“People had individual care plans that provided staff with up to date information about their needs and abilities, associated risks, preferences for support and background history.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw staff offering reassurance, showing patience and respecting privacy and dignity.
“We observed positive interactions between people and staff. People smiled and chatted with staff, sharing humour and conversation about their day.” from the report
Meaningful activities
The home offered activities every day, including individual activities based on people's interests. People could choose whether to join in.
“A varied range of social activities were organised to keep people entertained and stimulated. Activities were available every day and planned by the staff and people using the service.” from the report
Good oversight
The home used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor care and identify improvements. Inspectors found that lessons from incidents and complaints were acted on.
“The registered manager and staff completed regular checks and audits which helped ensure that people were safe, and the service met their needs.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are the new medicines systems and more frequent medicines audits working in practice?
- 02How would you support my relative if they need help with eating, drinking, swallowing or a special diet?
- 03How would you personalise activities for my relative's interests, abilities and choice not to take part?
- 04How do you review care plans when someone's health or needs change?
- 05What support is available for people living with dementia and for their families?
This was a planned inspection of the care and premises, covering all five CQC areas, and the first day was unannounced. 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 Hall Grange
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- December 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 January 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Croydon
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 £1,230 a week. 77 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Terry has been of invaluable help to our family while working as a part-time live-in carer for our mother for approximately 6 months”
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.