CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Harrier Grange
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, July 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe and responsive care, with improvements needed to confidential record-keeping and staff supervision.
This was the first inspection since the home registered with the CQC. It was unannounced and took place on 25 and 27 June 2018. Inspectors spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care, checked the building and reviewed care, staffing and quality records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were treated with kindness and dignity. Medicines, recruitment, risk assessments, care planning, activities, complaints and quality checks were managed appropriately.
There were two recommendations. The home was asked to provide a more secure place for daily care notes and care-related phone calls. It was also asked to review how often staff received formal supervision, as some staff had not received it regularly enough.
Kind and respectful care
Staff were patient and reassuring. They understood people's preferences, protected their dignity and encouraged independence.
“Staff treated people with dignity, respect and kindness.” from the report
Safe medicines and recruitment
Medicines were stored securely and records showed they were administered correctly. Recruitment checks included the required background and registration checks.
“Medicines were stored safely and securely, and procedures were in place to ensure people received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Personalised activities
The home offered group and individual activities based on people's interests and life histories. These included exercise, music, reminiscence, visits from a therapy dog and school visits.
“Activity sheets were made available to people at the beginning of each week and appeared full and varied.” from the report
Responsive care planning
People and relatives were involved in care plans. Plans included personal preferences and were reviewed when people's needs changed.
“People had person centred care plans that detailed the care and support people needed; this ensured that staff had the information they needed to provide consistent support for people.” from the report
Confidential records and conversations
needs fixingDaily notes were sometimes left unsecured in a dining area. Inspectors could also hear confidential care-related conversations, so they recommended a more secure environment.
“Care records and daily notes were at times left insecure on a table when staff were required to support people.” from the report
Staff supervision
needs fixingEight staff members who had worked at the home since January 2018 had received only one supervision meeting. Inspectors recommended reviewing the frequency of supervision so staff received enough guidance and support.
“Five members of staff had not received supervision as regularly as required in order to support them properly and needed improving” from the report
Busy periods
minorMost people said staff were available, but some people and one relative described occasional waits when staff were busy. Inspectors observed care being delivered in a timely way and found staffing levels were kept under review.
“It does get busy at certain times during the day and you may have to wait a little longer than usual but generally they [staff] are very quick when I press my buzzer” from the report
- 01What secure arrangements are now in place for writing daily care notes and making or receiving care-related phone calls?
- 02How often does each staff member now receive formal supervision, and how do you check that this happens?
- 03How do you make sure there are enough staff during the busiest parts of the day?
- 04How are care plans reviewed and changes communicated to every staff member?
- 05How can residents and relatives raise concerns or suggest improvements, and how are responses tracked?
This was an unannounced first inspection covering all five quality areas, the care provided and the premises; 29 people were living at the home at the time. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 July 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 Harrier Grange
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- July 2018Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 28 February 2017.
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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.