• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: The Grange Nursing Home

72 Upper Northam Road, Hedge End, Southampton, Hampshire, SO30 4EB (01489) 790177

Provided and run by:
Mr Roy Clive Northover & Mrs Heather Northover & Mrs Angela Louise Northover

All Inspections

6 February 2014

During a routine inspection

During our visit we spoke with nine people, five relatives, eight staff, healthcare professionals and the manager. To help us to understand people's experiences of the service we observed the care people were receiving at different times of the day. A person said the care was "excellent" and told us the staff looked after them "very well". People said they received help and support in a respectful manner. Another person said "the staff are marvellous and do a very good job". Relatives told us they were 'very happy' with the care and people were always well dressed and clean. A relative said they visited daily and the staff were always welcoming and added 'you can come in any time'. Another relative told us they came at different times of the day and there was "always staff around".

We saw the staff were courteous and respectful when providing care and support to people. People said they were offered choices and "they (the staff) always ask before they do anything". A person told us "you get up when you are ready" and "there is help when you need it". We observed staff supporting people with their meals and preserving people's dignity. Relatives told us "the staff keep me informed of how my husband is getting on". They said the staff had 'these people's interests at heart." This meant people or their relatives were involved in their care and treatment.

Arrangements were in place to ensure people received their prescribed medicines as needed. Medicines were stored safely and records were maintained appropriately.

People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

People were supported to raise their concerns and a person told us they had a family liaison person they could talk with. Staff told us information about how to raise concerns was available in people's bedrooms and this was part of their admission information sharing process. Records were maintained of any concerns investigated which included responses as appropriate. A complaint log was maintained and was made available to us at the time of the inspection.

22 October 2012

During a routine inspection

We spoke with nineteen people using the service, five relatives and ten staff. People and their relatives were complimentary about the service provided. Comments about staff included 'excellent', 'very, very caring', and ' very pleasant and kind'. We were told that members of staff were respectful, polite and available to meet needs. Detailed care plans and risk assessments were in place to guide staff but some entries needed to be up dated. Staff awareness of people's needs was good. We received mixed views about how involved people were in their care plans although personal records held information from people about preferences and wishes. The care plans were computerised and records lacked evidence of agreements about care and reviews with people and relatives. The service employed a Family Liaison Officer to aid communication.

Nursing and care staff had been trained and were aware of the local safeguarding procedures. However, domestic staff had not had recent training and were not clear of in house procedures. We found good staffing levels and positive feedback from people and relatives. However at key points of the day, such as lunchtime, people had to wait for care and we received some comments about this. Quality assurance procedures were in place. These included consultation with people who received the service, relatives and staff. This meant that they could influence the service.