CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Sutton Park Grange
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe. Staff understood people's risks, call bells were answered promptly, medicines were given as prescribed and safeguarding concerns were dealt with appropriately.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before they moved in. Staff had training and support, meals and drinks met people's preferences and dietary needs, and people could access healthcare services.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind, caring and respectful. People were involved in decisions about their care and were supported to maintain their privacy, dignity and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences and staff knew people well. The home offered activities, welcomed visitors, responded to complaints and was developing a sensory programme for people with dementia.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The new manager was seen as supportive and approachable, and staff, people and relatives reported a more positive atmosphere. Audits, meetings and risk reviews were in place, although medicine checks could be improved.
What inspectors found, August 2023
Sutton Park Grange rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with minor improvements needed in some records and checks.
Inspectors visited without advance warning on 27 and 29 June 2023. They spoke with people living in the home, visitors, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They also observed care and reviewed care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and that staff knew them well. Inspectors found appropriate staffing, safe medicines support, good food choices, access to healthcare, respectful care and personalised support.
The report also records some minor issues. Clearer guidance was needed in one catheter care plan, and one medicine count was initially incorrect. Both issues were addressed on the inspection day. This was the home's first inspection, so there is no previous CQC rating to compare.
People felt safe
People and relatives said they felt safe. Staff understood safeguarding and personal risks, and call bells were answered promptly.
“People told us they felt safe and were supported by a group of consistent staff who knew them well.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed staff treating people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were listened to and involved in their care.
“Staff presented as kind, caring and respectful and respected people's privacy and dignity.” from the report
Food and hydration
People had a range of meals, snacks and drinks. Their preferences and specialist dietary needs were taken into account.
“People were supported to enjoy a variety of meals, snacks and drinks throughout the day.” from the report
Personalised support and activities
Care records included personal preferences, and people could choose from activities such as crafts, singing, quizzes and exercise. A new sensory programme was being introduced.
“People were encouraged and invited to participate in a variety of activities that may be of interest to them.” from the report
Positive leadership
People, relatives and staff said the new manager had made a positive difference. Staff felt supported, and the home used meetings and audits to monitor care.
“The new registered manager had a positive impact on the service, and this was reported by staff, service users and relatives.” from the report
Catheter care guidance
minorOne catheter care plan needed clearer guidance. The home corrected this on the day of the inspection.
“We noted clearer guidance was needed in catheter care plans and this was addressed on the day of inspection.” from the report
Medicine record checks
minorInspectors found that one person's medicine count was initially incorrect. An explanation was given and the issue was put right on the inspection day.
“We found medication audits in place could be improved, for example, 1 person's medication count was incorrect.” from the report
Staff availability
minorOne person felt staff were often busy, although they said their call bell was answered promptly. Recruitment was still continuing even though the home said it was fully staffed.
“One person told us they did not think there were enough staff as they were 'always busy'” from the report
- 01How do you now check that catheter care plans contain clear and complete instructions?
- 02What checks are used to prevent medicine counts from being incorrect?
- 03How many staff are normally on duty for my relative's level of need, and how is this reviewed when needs change?
- 04How is the new sensory activities programme being introduced, and what training have staff received?
- 05What progress has been made with the planned end of life care work and the Gold Standard Framework?
This was an unannounced first inspection covering all five key questions, including infection prevention and control under Safe; there were no previous ratings to carry over. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 August 2023 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 Sutton Park Grange
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- August 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2021
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 11 June 2021.
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 Birmingham
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 £950 to £1,230 a week. 79 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“God doesn't make people like her anymore!”
“I have never met a person who is so kind and thinks about others before himself to such an extent as Chris Malagala.”
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.