CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Granleys
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home had safe infection prevention and control arrangements, including cleaning, protective equipment, testing and outbreak planning.
- Effective?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not assess the Effective question.
- Caring?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not assess the Caring question.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This targeted inspection did not assess the Responsive question.
- Well-led?
- Requires improvement
- This targeted inspection did not assess the Well-led question.
What inspectors found, May 2021
The Granleys was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control arrangements were safe.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 21 April 2021. It looked at how the home was prepared to prevent and manage coronavirus infections.
Inspectors found the home was clean and had cleaning schedules, protective equipment stations and visitor checks. People and staff were supported with coronavirus testing, and staff changed uniforms between shifts.
The home had infection control policies, outbreak plans and different zones to reduce the spread of infection. Inspectors were assured that the arrangements were safe, but the service was not given an overall quality rating.
Clean surroundings
The home was clean, without unpleasant smells, and had a schedule to make sure all areas were cleaned.
“The service was clean and free of malodour. There was a cleaning schedule in place to ensure all areas of the service were cleaned.” from the report
Visitor safety
Visitors were supported with infection control measures, protective equipment, symptom checks, temperature checks and coronavirus testing.
“Visitors were supported by staff to ensure they followed safe infection control, PPE guidance and to check whether they had any symptoms of coronavirus before entering the home.” from the report
Testing arrangements
People moving into the home and existing residents were supported with coronavirus testing. Staff testing was monitored and unclear results were followed up.
“Staff were compliant with weekly testing requirements and the registered manager ensured test results were followed up when not received.” from the report
Outbreak planning
The home had plans and designated zones intended to reduce infection spread and maintain people's health and staffing during an outbreak.
“The provider and Registered Manager had developed zones within the home to minimise the risk of infection spread during any Covid-19 outbreaks.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visitors currently checked and supported to follow infection control measures?
- 02How often are people living here and staff tested for infections now?
- 03What happens if a resident or staff member has an unclear or positive test result?
- 04How would you manage an infection outbreak, including staffing levels and people's health needs?
- 05Are the cleaning schedules, protective equipment stations and staff uniform arrangements still in place?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control under the Safe question; the service was inspected but not rated and the other four questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 May 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, September 2017
The Granleys was rated Good overall, but Requires Improvement for being well-led because some safety and recruitment checks were not reliably audited.
This was an unannounced inspection over two days in August 2017. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, staff, the provider's representative and health professionals. They reviewed care, medicines, recruitment, training, accidents and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for safe, effective, caring and responsive care. People had enough staff, safely managed medicines, individual care plans and access to health professionals. Inspectors saw kind and respectful support, and people took part in activities they chose.
The well-led rating was Requires Improvement. Some recruitment checks and records of fire system and water temperature checks were missing or incomplete. The provider took action during the inspection, but inspectors could not confirm that these changes had been sustained.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness, patience and sensitivity. People appeared comfortable with staff and were supported to maintain their dignity.
“Staff were attentive and responsive to people. They treated people with kindness, patience and sensitivity.” from the report
Enough staff
Staffing levels had increased to reflect people's changing needs. The home did not use agency staff and covered sickness and annual leave within the team.
“People were supported by sufficient staff to meet their needs.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records reflected people's routines, preferences and changing needs. People could choose how to spend their time and were supported to take part in community activities.
“People received individualised care and support which reflected their needs, wishes and routines important to them.” from the report
Improvements since the last inspection
The home had improved its infection control, recruitment processes and care planning since the previous comprehensive inspection. Improvements to the environment, records and staff support had been maintained.
“At this inspection we found the service was good and the service had made improvements to infection control systems and recruitment processes.” from the report
Quality checks did not find problems promptly
needs fixingAudits did not identify all the shortfalls found by inspectors. This included missing recruitment records and gaps in fire and water safety checks.
“Some improvement was needed to ensure all aspects of the service would be audited so that action would be taken to address shortfalls promptly.” from the report
Incomplete recruitment records
needs fixingSome checks, including identity verification and attempts to obtain full employment histories, were not consistently recorded for all new staff. The provider said this would be addressed.
“These included the verification of staff's identity and the attempts that had been made to obtain a full employment history.” from the report
Gaps in fire and water checks
needs fixingWeekly and monthly fire equipment and water temperature checks had not always been recorded. The provider arranged for them to be completed, but inspectors could not verify that this had continued.
“Records for fire system checks had not been completed between January and May 2017” from the report
- 01How do you now check that every new member of staff has had their identity and full employment history properly verified?
- 02What system is now used to make sure fire equipment and water temperatures are checked at the required intervals?
- 03Can you show us evidence that the actions taken during the inspection have been sustained?
- 04How are care plans kept up to date when a person's risks or needs change, including choking risks and any restrictions?
- 05How do people choose their activities, meals and daily routines, and how are these choices recorded?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection of all five key questions, covering the overall quality of the home and its legal requirements. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 September 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 The Granleys
7 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- May 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- September 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvement
- February 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvement
- October 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvement
- October 2015Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Gloucestershire
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 £1,030 to £1,360 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.