CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at The Grove Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that the home had suitable infection prevention and control arrangements. They found effective use of PPE, testing, cleaning, social distancing and procedures for preventing or managing outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, March 2021
The Grove Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good COVID-19 infection control arrangements, with one testing policy needing an update.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 3 March 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, admissions, shielding, social distancing, PPE, testing, cleaning and outbreaks safely. There was enough PPE, staff used it correctly, and regular cleaning and testing were in place.
The home supported contact between residents and their next of kin through visits in a pod, video calls and telephone calls. The home was also taking part in the COVID-19 vaccination programme.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or a standard rating for the five care questions.
COVID-19 procedures
The home had detailed arrangements for managing infection risks, including for people with a positive COVID-19 diagnosis.
“The home had comprehensive policies and procedures to manage any risks associated with the COVID-19 pandemic.” from the report
PPE and hand hygiene
There was plenty of PPE and hand sanitiser. Staff had been trained and were observed using PPE correctly.
“There was an ample supply of PPE for staff and any visitors to use.” from the report
Keeping families connected
Residents and their next of kin could keep in touch through pod visits, video calls and telephone calls.
“People living in the home and their next of kin were supported to maintain contact through a range of methods including visit appointments in a 'pod', video calls and the telephone.” from the report
Cleaning and testing
Daily cleaning schedules included extra cleaning of frequently touched areas. Regular COVID-19 testing was in place for residents and staff.
“The home employed two housekeepers and daily cleaning schedules were undertaken and these were enhanced with additional touch point cleaning.” from the report
Testing policy needed updating
minorThe home’s written policy did not yet reflect the requirement for staff to have twice-weekly lateral flow tests. The manager said the policy would be updated.
“However the home's policy required updating to reflect the requirement for staff to undertake twice weekly lateral flow testing.” from the report
- 01Has the policy for twice-weekly staff lateral flow testing now been updated?
- 02How often are staff and residents currently tested for COVID-19?
- 03What visiting arrangements are currently available, including pod visits and indoor visits?
- 04How does the home respond if a resident or staff member tests positive?
- 05How often are frequently touched areas cleaned, and how is this recorded?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; it was not a full assessment of the other care quality questions and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 March 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 2019
The Grove Care Home was rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe care, with some records and complaint processes needing improvement.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 22 January 2019. Inspectors observed care, spoke with people living in the home, visitors and staff, and checked care plans, medicines, recruitment records, training, complaints and quality checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People generally said they felt safe and were happy with their care. Inspectors saw kind and respectful interactions, good activities, suitable food and detailed care plans.
There were some smaller weaknesses. Two staff files did not contain suitable references, employment histories were not fully requested, and some concerns and complaint information were not recorded as well as they should have been. The home also needed to improve witnessing when medicines were disposed of.
The overall Good rating stayed the same as at the October 2016 inspection. The report says there was no evidence of serious risks or concerns.
Kind and respectful care
People and visitors were positive about staff. Inspectors saw staff listening, offering reassurance and treating people with dignity.
“During the inspection, we saw staff were attentive to people's needs and we observed caring and respectful interactions towards people.” from the report
Personal care planning
Care plans included people's preferences, routines and changing health needs. Staff used them to provide personalised support.
“The care plans were person-centred, detailed and organised and included valuable information about people's likes, dislikes, preferences and routines” from the report
Activities and interests
The home offered varied activities and was working to understand and fulfil people's interests and wishes.
“People were happy with the range of activities and entertainments available to them and said they enjoyed taking part.” from the report
Staff training and support
Staff received induction, training, supervision and appraisals. Inspectors found staff understood people's needs and had the skills to support them.
“Staff received a wide range of training that enabled them to support people in a safe and effective way.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used audits and feedback to identify improvements and track actions.
“There was a clear and effective system to monitor the quality of the service.” from the report
Recruitment records
needs fixingTwo staff files did not contain an appropriate reference, and application forms did not ask for a full employment history. The manager said all files would be checked.
“We found two staff did not have an appropriate reference on their recruitment files and the application form did not request a full employment history” from the report
Recording complaints and concerns
needs fixingThe complaints procedure did not include contact details for the local ombudsman or local authority. Inspectors also found that some concerns were not recorded in line with the home's process.
“The procedure did not include the contact information for the local ombudsman or the local authority” from the report
Medicine disposal records
needs fixingThe home needed to make sure a witness was present when medicines were disposed of.
“We discussed, with the registered manager, the importance of obtaining a witness for medicine disposal.” from the report
Occasional delays for help
minorMost people felt staffing was sufficient, but one relative reported delays. A survey also identified waits for staff responses, particularly in the morning.
“The recent customer survey had identified some people had waited for a response from staff, particularly in the morning” from the report
Some staff attitude concerns
minorAlthough most feedback about staff was positive, some people made less favourable comments about staff attitude. The management team had identified this and was taking action.
“However, people also made less favourable comments about staff attitude and one person commented staff were 'nearly all good'.” from the report
- 01What action was taken after the missing references and incomplete employment history information were found in recruitment files?
- 02How do you now record and follow up complaints and concerns, and where can relatives find outside complaint contacts?
- 03How do you make sure medicines are witnessed when they are disposed of?
- 04What has changed to reduce waits for staff help, particularly in the morning?
- 05How are residents and relatives now involved in care plan reviews and meetings?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, and the ratings remained Good from the October 2016 inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 February 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.
Every inspection of The Grove Care Home
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 January 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
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.