CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Stanley Grange
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staffing, recruitment, medicines, infection control and learning from incidents were all found to be managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received support based on their needs and choices, with input from other professionals where needed. Staff were trained and supported, and people were helped with nutrition, health, independence and community access.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- Staff treated people with exceptional kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in their care and encouraged to do as much as possible for themselves.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and activities reflected people's interests and needs. However, people gave mixed feedback about how complaints were handled and how outcomes were shared.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found positive leadership, high staff morale and effective quality checks. People, relatives and professionals gave positive feedback about how the home was run.
What inspectors found, March 2020
Stanley Grange was rated Good overall; inspectors found exceptionally caring support, with some improvements still needed to complaint handling and the service model.
This was an unannounced inspection on 17 and 21 January 2020. Inspectors spoke with 11 people, 12 staff and four relatives. They reviewed care records, medicines records, incident records, training information and quality checks. They also looked around the buildings.
The home was rated Good for safe, effective and responsive care, and for being well-led. Caring was rated Outstanding, improving from Good at the previous inspection. Inspectors found kind, respectful staff who supported people to make choices, build independence and take part in community life.
There were two main areas for improvement. People gave mixed views about how complaints were handled and how outcomes were shared. Inspectors also said the campus-style model was not in line with current best practice, although the provider had made changes to reduce its impact.
Kind and respectful care
Staff were highly compassionate and treated people as individuals. Inspectors saw a strong culture of dignity, respect and kindness.
“People were supported by staff who were incredibly kind and caring and who maintained their dignity and privacy and treated them with respect.” from the report
Promoting independence
People were supported to make choices, take positive risks and do more for themselves. Some people travelled into the community without staff support.
“A number of people were able independently use a local bus service to travel to the city centre with no staff support.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's needs, communication methods, preferences and goals. Activities and living arrangements were adapted to individuals.
“Staff showed an understanding of what was important to people, their preferences and needs, and how best to meet them.” from the report
Safe care systems
Inspectors found safe recruitment, enough staff, suitable medicines processes and systems for learning from accidents and incidents.
“The provider operated systems to ensure there were enough suitably qualified staff to meet people's assessed needs.” from the report
Positive leadership
The management team created a supportive culture. Staff were motivated and quality checks led to actions, training or further support when needed.
“A programme of effective quality assurance and checks was in place.” from the report
Campus-style setting
minorInspectors said the overall campus model was not consistent with current best practice. The provider had made changes to the structure and accommodation, but further modernisation was still to be discussed.
“The campus style model of service delivery offered to people at this setting does not meet current best practice” from the report
- 01How are complaints recorded, investigated and shared with people and relatives?
- 02What changes are planned to modernise the campus-style model of accommodation?
- 03How are best-interest decisions recorded when someone cannot make a particular decision?
- 04How will you support my relative to build independence and access the local community?
- 05How do you make sure staff understand my relative's communication needs and personal preferences?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions; the previous overall rating was Good, published on 19 July 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 March 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, July 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with improvements since earlier breaches.
This was an unannounced inspection on 7 and 8 June 2017. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and managers. They observed care, reviewed five care records, and checked medicines, staff files, training and quality records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable training, personalised care plans and a positive atmosphere.
The home had previously breached rules about medicines, consent and quality monitoring at the inspection on 16 March 2016. Inspectors found that improvements had been made and that the previous shortfalls had been addressed.
Improved medicines safety
Medicines records were complete, current and accurate. Staff checked handwritten information with a second staff member, and topical treatments were recorded consistently.
“We found that the systems in place for the safe administration of medicines were now sufficient to ensure safe medicines management.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described people's wishes, routines, communication, preferences and goals. People were involved in developing and reviewing their plans.
“We found that in all cases the records were very detailed and very person centred, as they referenced things which made each person an individual” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff being patient and compassionate. Staff understood how people communicated and supported their privacy and dignity.
“During the inspection, we saw staff treated people with kindness and patience.” from the report
Good involvement and choice
People were supported to direct their own lives, make decisions and take part in activities in the community. Families and people were asked for their views.
“The staff we spoke with were fully committed to supporting individuals to lead purposeful and fulfilling lives as independently as possible.” from the report
Improvements in management
Quality audits had become more effective since the previous inspection. They were used to identify errors, risks and areas needing improvement.
“The audits were now more effective and their usage picked up areas for improvement or evidence of poor practice.” from the report
Staffing review planned
minorInspectors found staffing levels were sufficient for people's assessed needs at the inspection. The registered manager said staffing levels would be reviewed with commissioners within the next 12 months.
“We found that Stanley Grange had sufficient staffing levels to meet people's assessed needs, which the registered manager informed us, will be reviewed with commissioners within the next 12 months.” from the report
- 01How are medicines records checked now, and how do you make sure handwritten entries are always clear?
- 02How are staffing levels adjusted when people have appointments, activities or changing support needs?
- 03How are mental capacity assessments and DoLS authorisations kept up to date?
- 04How often will my relative's care plan and risk assessments be reviewed, and how can they take part?
- 05How are complaints, incidents and family feedback used to make changes?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service and all five CQC question areas, with ratings given for each area. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 July 2017 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 Stanley Grange
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- March 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 October 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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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 £1,260 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.