- Care home
Grovelands
Report from 16 April 2025 assessment
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
This assessment was carried out between 30 June 2025 and 25 July 2025. We visited the home on 2 July 2025.
At the time of the inspection there were 44 people using the service. Two people were in hospital at the time of our visit.
Grovelands had a deeply embedded culture of continuous learning and improvement, driven by a highly committed and passionate registered manager and deputy manager. Their strong professional relationship and clear understanding of their respective roles and responsibilities created a cohesive leadership team. This was further enhanced by consistent support from the provider’s senior management and quality assurance teams, ensuring strategic oversight and operational excellence.
Robust and proactive risk management systems were firmly in place, ensuring the safety and wellbeing of people using the service. These systems were regularly reviewed and adapted to meet emerging needs and best practice standards
The home was visibly clean, well-maintained, and supported by comprehensive infection prevention and control measures. Regular audits were conducted, with prompt action taken to address any concerns. Staff were well-trained in infection control protocols and had ready access to appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), ensuring a safe environment for both residents and staff
Accidents and incidents were recorded and monitored. A clear and effective process was in place for identifying trends, implementing learning, and improving practice, demonstrating a strong commitment to safety and continuous improvement.
Communication across the home was exemplary. Regular staff meetings and structured feedback mechanisms for residents and families ensured transparency and responsiveness.
Staff consistently expressed pride in their work and highlighted a strong sense of team spirit and mutual support, contributing to a positive and nurturing atmosphere.
People's experience of this service
People were supported by a consistent, compassionate, and dedicated staff team who demonstrated kindness, respect, and genuine care in their interactions. Staff consistently promoted people’s independence, dignity, and choice, fostering a culture of empowerment and inclusion. People benefited from a stable and well-trained workforce, with no reliance on agency staff for over 5 years. This continuity contributed to strong relationships between staff and people using the service, enhancing trust and emotional wellbeing. Staff had received comprehensive and relevant training, enabling them to support people safely and effectively. Staff administering medicines had completed appropriate training and were subject to regular competency assessments, ensuring best practice and reducing risk. People’s rooms were highly personalised, reflecting their identities and preferences. The use of memory boxes outside some rooms was particularly notable. These boxes, containing meaningful items specific to each person, helped stimulate memories, supported orientation, and encouraged meaningful conversations between staff and residents. Visitors were welcomed without restriction, promoting family involvement and social connection. The home fostered an open and inclusive environment where people could maintain relationships that mattered to them. The mealtime experience was calm and enjoyable. People were offered choices and supported appropriately by staff. The introduction of new table menus aimed to further enhance autonomy and prompt decision-making, reflecting a commitment to continuous improvement. Care planning was person-centred and inclusive, involving people, their families, and friends where appropriate. Plans included end-of-life preferences, ensuring care was respectful and aligned with individual wishes. The provider’s ‘resident of the day’ process ensured care plans and risk assessments were regularly reviewed and remained accurate and responsive to changing needs. Feedback from health and social care professionals was consistently positive, highlighting effective collaboration and high standards of care. A structured activity programme was in place, supporting engagement and wellbeing. While a temporary gap in activities was noted on one unit due to staff sickness, this was an exception and not reflective of usual practice. People and staff were confident in raising concerns, and safeguarding processes were well understood and embedded. Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and best interest decisions were appropriately managed, ensuring people’s rights were upheld. People had access to healthcare services and attended appointments as needed, with staff supporting them to maintain their health and wellbeing.