We carried out a review of the data available to us about Granby Rose SDU on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Granby Rose SDU, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
Infection prevention and control (IPC) procedures were clear and followed by staff. All staff were trained in safe IPC practices. We observed staff wearing appropriate PPE and plentiful supplies were available at designated stations around the home.
A regular programme of testing for COVID-19 was in place for staff and people who lived in the service. There had been a good uptake of residents receiving the COVID-19 vaccine. The service had plans in place and knew how to respond to an outbreak of infection to ensure the safety of people and staff.
Effective systems were in place to ensure staff and visitors to the service followed government guidelines for wearing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). Screening questions, lateral flow testing and a temperature check were standard requirements for all visitors.
Granby Rose SDU is owned by Four Seasons 2000 Limited, a subsidiary of Four Season's Health Care. The home is registered as a care home with nursing and provides support and care for up to 25 older people living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 20 people using the service; 19 people required nursing care and one person required residential care.
The provider is required to have a registered manager in post and on the day of our inspection there was a newly registered manager at this service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run. Throughout this report we will refer to the registered manager as ‘the manager’.
Medicine management practices were being reviewed by the manager and action was taken to ensure medicines were given safely and as prescribed by people’s GPs.
The dining experience for some people was not satisfactory, with people waiting for assistance from staff with eating and drinking. Immediate action was taken by the manager to change the working practice within the service, once this was brought to their attention.
People told us they felt safe and were well cared for. There were sufficient staff employed to assist people with their personal care and recruitment of staff was carried out safely.
People that used the service were supported by qualified and competent staff that were regularly supervised and appraised regarding their personal performance. Communication was effective, people’s mental capacity was appropriately assessed and their rights were protected.
People had their health and social care needs assessed and plans of care were developed to guide staff in how to support people. The plans of care were individualised to include preferences, likes and dislikes. People who used the service received additional care and treatment from health professionals based in the community. People had risk assessments in their care files to help minimise risks whilst still supporting people to make choices and decisions.
Staff were knowledgeable about people’s individual care needs and care plans were person centred and detailed. There was a range of social activities available, which people enjoyed.
People told us that the service was well managed and organised. The manager assessed and monitored the quality of care provided to people. People and staff were asked for their views and their suggestions were used to continuously improve the service.