Archived: The Grange Residential Care Home

People who lived at The Grange Residential Care Home told us they were happy with the care and support that they received. Staff treated people in a kind and caring way and gave people choices about the way their care and support was delivered. People were encouraged to live as independently as possible.

Staff were suitably trained and knew people’s needs well. Risks were managed safely and staff knew how to protect people from the risk of abuse and harm.

Care plans were individualised and people had their life histories documented to help staff deliver effective and personalised care. People were involved in the planning of their care.

People and staff thought the management team were approachable and supportive.

More information is in the full report.

Rating at last inspection:

At our last inspection (report published 16 April 2016) the service was rated Good overall with the key question of Effective rated as Requires Improvement. At this inspection, the key question Effective is now rated as Good.

About the service:

The Grange Residential Care Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 34 people, some of whom may be living with dementia. At the time of our inspection, there were 34 people using the service. The home is set out over three floors and has three bedrooms that are double occupancy.

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the date and the rating of the last inspection.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor the service through information we receive until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.

At our last inspection on 24 February 2015 we found that improvements were required to ensure people were supported appropriately when they were unable to make decisions for themselves. We also found that there were not enough staff to meet people’s needs in a timely manner or support people to take part in activities to prevent them becoming bored. We undertook an unannounced inspection on 10 March 2016 to ensure that improvements had been made in all of these areas.

Staffing levels had been re-considered and improved since our last inspection. People received timely support from a sufficient number of suitably recruited staff who sat with them in the communal areas. Staff understood their responsibility to protect people from avoidable harm and potential abuse and knew how to report concerns.

People’s views were respected and staff sought their consent before providing care. There were capacity assessments in place to support people who needed support to make decisions which were in their best interest. Applications had been made to deprive some people of their liberty to keep them safe from harm. However for some people these were not necessary and demonstrated staff did not fully understand the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff received training and support to provide effective care and support for people living in the home. People received kind and compassionate care from staff who treated them with dignity. People were encouraged to retain their independence and their privacy was respected. Staff understood people’s likes and dislikes and provided care which met their preferences. People’s physical, mental and psychological health was monitored by staff. Specialist advice was sought and implemented when necessary.

People’s relatives and friends could visit whenever they chose. People and their families were happy to discuss concerns or complaints with the registered manager and felt reassured by the responses they received.

There were opportunities for people to join in group social activities or receive support on a one-to-one basis to reduce the risk of boredom and social isolation. People’s care was reviewed regularly to ensure it continued to meet their needs.

People were encouraged to voice their opinion of the service and feedback comments and suggestions. People, relatives and staff were happy with the management of the home and felt supported by the registered manager. The quality of the service was reviewed and monitored to ensure the systems in place were safe and effective.

People told us they were happy living at the home. One person said: "They look after me well". A relative said: "It's very good. I can't fault them".

People were involved in decisions about their care. Meetings were held with people to check that care was provided in the way they wished. We saw that people were treated with respect and that their privacy was promoted.

The home was supporting people to have their health and personal care needs met. People were seen by their GP and received specialist health care support when needed.

The home was clean and practices were in place to control the risk of the spread of infections. One person commented: "My bedroom is spotless".

Care staff were trained in safeguarding people and were aware of their responsibilities to act upon any concerns. Systems were in place to make sure that people's money was kept safe.

There were systems in place to monitor and review the quality of care people received. People's views about the service were sought and acted upon.

People were consulted about their care and we observed that they received the care they needed. People told us how they spend their day. They said that they got up and go to bed when they choose. They told us that their friends and relatives were able to visit them.

People told us that staff were kind and caring. They told us that staff assisted them when they needed it. One person said, "They are very good with everything', a relative said, "They are all marvellous".

Medication storage was appropriate and records had all been fully completed. Safeguards had been put in place to try to eliminate the risk of medication errors from occurring. The home had appropriate medication policies and regular audits had taken place.

The home had appropriate systems in place to enable people to raise concerns and be confident that their concerns would be investigated and addressed.

Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service provided and people were asked for their views.