Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at Tigh Grianan

Goodpublished 16 October 2018, 7 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
Inspectors found that people were safe, risks were managed, staffing levels were sufficient and medicines were administered, recorded and stored safely.
Effective?
Good
People's needs were assessed before and after moving in. Staff were trained, supported people's food and healthcare needs, and understood the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
Caring?
Good
Staff treated people with kindness, compassion, dignity and respect. People were supported to make choices, build independence and maintain relationships.
Responsive?
Outstanding
Care plans were highly personalised and people were supported to achieve health, work, education and independence goals. Activities were chosen around people's interests and wishes.
Well-led?
Good
The home had strong leadership, an involved staff team and regular checks on care, medicines, infection control and safety. People and relatives were involved in giving feedback and shaping the service.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, October 2018

Rated Good overall, with Outstanding responsive care and inspectors finding people safe, respected and supported to reach their goals.

This was an announced inspection on 15 June 2018. Two inspectors met all six people living at the home, spoke with four relatives and contacted health and social care professionals. They also reviewed care records, staff files, training, medicines, rotas, policies and quality checks.

The inspectors found people were safe and supported by enough suitably trained staff. Medicines were managed safely. People received kind and respectful care, had choices about daily life and food, and were supported to use health services.

Responsive care was rated Outstanding. Staff knew people well and helped them pursue personal goals, activities, education, work and relationships. The home was rated Good overall, with Good ratings for Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led. These ratings continued from the previous inspection, while Responsive remained Outstanding.

What inspectors praised
  • Personalised goals

    The home supported people to work towards goals that mattered to them. Inspectors saw examples involving public transport, using cutlery independently and setting up a cleaning business.

    “People's goals about their health and well-being had improved because of the support they received” from the report
  • Meaningful activities

    People were supported to take part in activities, education, work and community life. Staff involved people in choosing and planning events.

    “Staff were devoted to ensuring each person found their lives were enriched by their experience of life within the service and their local community.” from the report
  • Kind and respectful care

    Inspectors observed a calm atmosphere and positive interactions. Staff respected privacy, dignity, communication needs and personal choices.

    “Staff treated people with compassion, kindness and respect.” from the report
  • Safe support

    Risk assessments, emergency plans, safeguarding procedures and medicine systems were in place. Staff understood people's needs and how to respond when someone was distressed or at risk.

    “Medicines were administered, recorded and stored safely. People had their medicines on time and as prescribed and given by competent staff.” from the report
  • Strong leadership

    The manager and staff team had a clear focus on people's quality of life. Regular audits, feedback and checks were used to monitor and improve the service.

    “The views of people were at the core of quality monitoring and assurance arrangements.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about

Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.

Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01How would you support my relative to set, review and achieve their own goals?
  2. 02What experience do staff have of supporting autism, epilepsy and mental health needs?
  3. 03How would you communicate with my relative if they could not explain that they were distressed or unwell?
  4. 04What restrictions might be used to keep my relative safe, and how would Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards requirements be followed?
  5. 05How are relatives involved in care planning, reviews and decisions about health or end of life care?

This was a planned, announced inspection covering the overall service and all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided; the previous ratings continued from 2016. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 October 2018 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Tigh Grianan

2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. October 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good

    Read what inspectors found at Tigh Grianan →

  2. June 2016Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good

    We are reading this report · the original is on cqc.org.uk

  3. November 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  4. April 2013

    Report published without a new overall rating.

    Read this report on cqc.org.uk

  5. August 2012

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 August 2012.

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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey

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 £1,250 a week. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.

“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
Emma P., about Aman A.
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
Clare M., about Zion S.
See live-in carers near SurreyProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.