CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Scremby Grange
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Risks were assessed and reviewed, medicines were stored and given safely, and staff understood safeguarding procedures.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed and reviewed. Staff had relevant training, people received healthcare when needed, and support followed Mental Capacity Act requirements.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were supported to make choices, express their views and maintain their independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed, current and personalised. People were supported with activities, family links, communication needs and complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had quality checks, action plans and an open culture. Relatives and staff could share their views, although some relatives wanted more structured communication.
What inspectors found, July 2019
Scremby Grange is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with communication arrangements for relatives being improved.
This was a planned inspection on 11 June 2019. One inspector reviewed care records, medicines arrangements, staffing and management records. They spoke with six people living at the home, staff, managers, a health professional and three relatives.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and well cared for. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines support, clean surroundings and care plans that were detailed and up to date.
The home supported people with learning disabilities and/or autism to make choices, build independence and take part in activities, education and work. The overall Good rating was unchanged from the previous inspection, published in October 2016.
Personalised support
Care plans were detailed and up to date. People were supported to follow their interests, keep family links and develop life skills and independence.
“Care records were easy for people and staff to access, were detailed and up to date” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff knew people well and communicated in ways people preferred. Inspectors saw caring and understanding interactions.
“The registered manager and all of the staff we spoke with knew people and their needs very well” from the report
Safe care
Risks were assessed, medicines were handled safely and staff understood safeguarding. Staffing levels were planned around people's needs.
“Where people needed support with their medicines, this was provided safely and in line with good practice” from the report
Choice and independence
People were encouraged to make their own decisions, personalise their rooms and take part in education, work and activities.
“People were encouraged to make their own decisions and choices.” from the report
Learning and improvement
The home reviewed incidents and used positive behaviour support with outside professionals. Inspectors found examples of improved wellbeing and fewer incidents.
“The work undertaken included confirmation that the registered provider and manager had continued to develop their approach to interventions” from the report
Relative communication
minorTwo relatives said informal communication worked well but could be more structured, especially for information shared before visits. The manager took action to agree a future communication plan.
“Two other relatives told us informal communications worked well but that this might be improved through the implementation of a more structured arrangement” from the report
- 01How do you now give relatives structured updates before visits?
- 02How are each person's care plan and life goals reviewed, and how is their feedback recorded?
- 03How do you support people to develop independence through activities, education, work or daily tasks?
- 04How do staff use positive behaviour support when someone becomes distressed?
- 05How do you check that medicines, staffing levels and personalised risk plans remain safe?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided; all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 4 July 2019 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 2016
Scremby Grange was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised support with effective management.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 15 August 2016. Inspectors spoke with four people living at the home, two family members and staff. They observed care and checked three care plans, staffing, training and quality records.
The home supported up to 19 people with a learning disability or autism. There were 17 people living there on the inspection day. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, clear risk plans and appropriate checks and training for staff.
Inspectors found kind staff who understood people's communication and support needs. People were involved in their care, meals and activities. They were supported to stay in touch with family, use the community and develop independence.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. The report does not mention any breaches, enforcement action or special measures.
Safe staffing
Staffing levels were monitored against people's needs. The home had arrangements to provide suitable cover when staff were absent.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs and systems in place meant that cover was available if staff were unable to work due to sickness.” from the report
Kind communication
Staff took time to understand people and had skills to communicate with people who used signs, tools or other communication support.
“People were supported by kind, caring staff who were able to use tools and sign languages to communicate” from the report
Activities and independence
People were supported to take part in activities at home, in the community and on holidays. Some people also worked through the provider's employment services.
“People were supported to access the community and were able to participate in a wide range of activities.” from the report
Listening and oversight
People, relatives and healthcare professionals were asked for their views. The home used audits and other checks to identify and address issues.
“There were effective systems in place to monitor the quality of the care and the environment and action was taken to resolve any issues.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are current staffing levels matched to my relative's individual support needs, including extra support when needs change?
- 02How are medicines prescribed to be taken as required managed, and how do you check that other support is considered before they are used?
- 03What would happen if my relative became distressed, and how would any restraint be recorded, reviewed and reduced?
- 04How would my relative be involved in planning meals, activities and their care plan?
- 05How would you support my relative to keep in touch with family, use the community and develop work or other independence skills?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, including all five CQC questions, care observations, three care plans and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 October 2016 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 Scremby Grange
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- July 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 May 2011.
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
9 live-in carers within about an hour of Lincolnshire
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.
8 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Martin was more than a carer, he managed the home and became my uncle's best friend, enriching his life during his last few years.”
“Magda was always positive and proactive about trying new things to keep dad busy. She also introduced new ideas for keeping dad healthy.”
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.