CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Littleport Grange
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were safe. They found effective use of PPE, testing, cleaning, zoning and outbreak planning.
- Effective?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- This question was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This question was not assessed as a separate rated question in this targeted inspection, although inspectors described communication, audits and outbreak planning.
What inspectors found, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection control arrangements were safe and well organised.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 28 January 2021. It was carried out because of coronavirus outbreaks in care homes and focused on infection prevention and control.
Inspectors found good arrangements for hand washing, protective equipment, testing, cleaning and social distancing. The home used separate areas and staff zoning to help prevent infection spreading.
Inspectors were also assured that the home had plans for managing a COVID-19 outbreak, including staffing pressures. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a full rating of the home or its care.
Protective equipment and testing
Staff followed the correct process for putting on and removing PPE. Staff and visitors had temperature checks and lateral flow tests before entering.
“Staff followed the correct procedure for putting on and removing PPE.” from the report
Clean environment
The building was clean and uncluttered. High-touch areas such as door handles were cleaned regularly.
“The building looked clean and free from clutter.” from the report
Infection control planning
The home carried out regular infection control audits and divided the building into areas so staff could work in set zones.
“The registered manager ensured regular infection control audit checks were completed.” from the report
Outbreak preparation
The home had a contingency plan for dealing with a COVID-19 outbreak, including possible staffing problems.
“The registered manager had a good contingency plan in place to manage the challenges that could arise from a COVID-19 outbreak.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What has changed in your infection prevention and control arrangements since the inspection on 28 January 2021?
- 02How do you currently test staff and visitors before they enter the home?
- 03How do you make sure PPE is used correctly by all staff?
- 04How often are infection control audits completed, and what happens when an audit finds a problem?
- 05What are your current plans for managing an outbreak or staffing shortage?
This was an unannounced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control practices only, so the service was inspected but not rated and the other care questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 February 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, February 2018
Littleport Grange was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care and Outstanding support for people's individual interests and activities.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 12 December 2017. Two inspectors and an expert by experience spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care and checked care plans, medicines records, recruitment files, training and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led were all rated Good. Responsive was rated Outstanding, because care was highly personal and people were supported to enjoy a wide range of activities, hobbies and community events.
Inspectors found enough suitably recruited staff, safe medicines management, good support with health and nutrition, and kind care that respected privacy and choice. They found one medicines-recording shortfall: some instructions for medicines given when needed did not contain enough detail, and the manager said this would be corrected.
Personalised activities
The home offered varied activities based on people's interests, memories and backgrounds. Inspectors saw evidence that these activities brought people pleasure and helped them stay connected with their past and community.
“Staff had gone the extra mile in providing a wide range of social stimulation, pastimes, hobbies and interests that enabled people to live their lives to the absolute best they possibly could.” from the report
Kind and dignified care
Staff responded gently when people were upset or confused. They respected privacy, dignity, communication needs and personal choices.
“People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion.” from the report
Safe staffing and risk management
Inspectors found enough suitably skilled staff and saw that risks such as falls, choking and malnutrition were assessed and monitored.
“A sufficient number of skilled staff had been recruited safely. Risks were identified and managed.” from the report
Food and nutrition
People were offered choices, snacks and drinks throughout the day. Staff made adjustments for different diets and responded early when people were at risk of malnutrition.
“Three different meal choices were available as well as alternative menus. Drinks and snacks were served to people throughout the day.” from the report
Open management
Inspectors found that the manager was visible and approachable, and that staff, people and relatives were involved in how the home was run.
“The registered manager led by example and had fostered a staff team who were committed to providing high quality care.” from the report
Incomplete instructions for some medicines
needs fixingSome protocols for pain relief and other medicines given when needed did not explain why the medicine was needed. The records also did not always state the quantity or how long it should be given.
“The protocols for as and when pain relief or homely remedies did not contain information for staff about why this pain relief or homely remedies was needed.” from the report
- 01Have the protocols for medicines given when needed been updated to explain why each medicine is needed, the quantity and how long it should be given?
- 02How would you support my relative's particular interests, memories, cultural background and preferred activities?
- 03How many staff would normally be available for my relative's needs, and how are staff with the right skills allocated?
- 04How would you support my relative's dietary needs, including any risk of malnutrition, choking or a special diet?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in care planning, reviews and decisions about risks or end of life care?
This was the first comprehensive ratings inspection under the home's current registration and covered all five key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 February 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 Littleport Grange
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2018GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- November 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 November 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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Cambridgeshire
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 £1,200 a week. 14 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
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.