The Grange Nursing Home

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 79 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a culture based on transparency, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, and understanding the needs of people and their communities.

The manager set a good example in their behaviours and conduct, exemplifying fairness, equality and inclusion. A member of staff told us, "The manager is very good, very professional. She treats everyone equally. She is very friendly, but she maintains boundaries."

Professionals told us the manager and staff worked in a collaborative way. One professional said, “They are also so open and transparent, and work really well with the local authority.”

The manager had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty.

People told us the manager led by example in their attitudes and behaviours. One person told us, "[Manager] is brilliant. She is very much a hands-on manager." This sentiment was echoed by relatives, one of whom told us, “The manager is incredibly caring.”

Some relatives told us the manager had been extremely supportive to them in dealing with issues relating to their family member’s care they found challenging, such as liaising with commissioners and other professionals. One relative said of the manager, "She is very compassionate and very helpful." Another relative told us, “[Manager] is brilliant, she has helped me so much. Since Christmas she has spent so much of her own time trying to help me understand how it all works.”

The manager had worked at the home for a number of years and had developed a detailed knowledge of, and effective working relationships with, professionals in the area, including healthcare professionals and the local authority. One professional said of the manager, “She is very proactive and responsive.”

Staff said the manager was a skilled and experienced leader, and that they valued the support the manager provided. The manager worked some shifts alongside staff providing people’s care to ensure they had a good understanding of people’s needs and how staff should best support them.

The manager had previously been the registered manager of the home from 2017 to 2023. The manager had recently rejoined the home following a break, and had begun the process of re-registering with CQC.

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard.

People told us they would feel comfortable raising any concerns they had and were confident these would be listened to and acted on. None of the relatives we spoke with had made a complaint, but all were confident any concerns they raised would receive an appropriate response. One relative told us, “I have never had to make a complaint, but if I did I would email the manager directly. I always receive prompt responses to emails.” Another relative said, “If I had a complaint I would go straight to [manager]. We have a good connection with her, but everyone is approachable and friendly; it’s a very inclusive setting.”

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them.

The provider’s recruitment procedures helped ensure equality of opportunity for applicants, and staff who were appointed benefited from a working culture in which bullying and harassment were not tolerated.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate.

There were effective systems in place to monitor the safety and quality of the service. The manager and senior staff carried out regular checks and audits on key aspects of the service, such as medicines management, infection control, and care planning.

The local authority had carried out a quality assessment of the home in June 2024 which identified areas of good practice and found people received safe, personalised care.

The manager and staff understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement.

We saw that good outcomes for people had been achieved through effective collaborative working between staff and healthcare professionals. Staff explained the importance of sharing information with partners to ensure people received the care they needed. An external professional told us, “The home works well with [local authority] Quality Assurance and also with the locality team.”

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. They encouraged creative ways of delivering equality of experience, outcome and quality of life for people. They actively contributed to safe, effective practice and research.

Staff told us they had opportunities to contribute to the development of the service and that any suggestions they made for improvements were listened to.

The provider had made use of technology to improve outcomes for people. For example, a digital care planning system had been introduced, and an acoustic monitoring system had been made available that used sensors to monitor people during the night.The system detected changes in sound and motion to alert staff when a person needed assistance, potentially reducing the need for more intrusive physical checks.