The Grange Nursing Home

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 14 May 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of Assessment: 9 and 10 February 2026 and 14 April 2026.

The service is a nursing home providing support to older people who may be living with dementia or have limited mobility or cognitive function. We inspected the service because we received some information of concern.

At the time of the initial visit staffing levels were not sufficient to meet people’s needs consistently, which meant staff were often task‑focused and rushed. As a result, people sometimes waited longer for support, opportunities for meaningful interaction were limited, and the promotion of independence was less consistent. People, relatives and staff all described the impact of these pressures, and staff morale and wellbeing were affected.

Leadership oversight was also inconsistent at this time. Staff described limited leadership visibility and a lack of confidence that concerns would lead to action. Monitoring and improvement activity was not sufficiently embedded, which reduced assurance that issues affecting people’s experiences were being identified and addressed promptly. Feedback from people and relatives had not always resulted in visible change, which led some to feel hesitant about raising concerns.

Despite these challenges, safeguarding and infection prevention arrangements remained in place, and people consistently told us they felt safe. Staff treated people with dignity and kindness, providing a stable foundation for improvement.

Following inspection feedback, the provider responded positively and took action to address the issues identified. Staffing capacity was increased, deployment arrangements improved and roles clarified. By the follow‑up visit, staffing levels were more stable, staff were less rushed and people experienced more timely and responsive support. The environment felt calmer, and staff had more time to engage with people, support their interests and build relationships.

Leadership presence increased, and staff reported feeling listened to and supported. Oversight arrangements improved, helping the service respond more effectively to issues affecting people’s care. As capacity increased, staff were better able to promote independence, choice and control, and care became more consistently person‑centred. People were supported to manage risks, access healthcare services and engage in activities that reflected what mattered to them.

By the follow‑up visit, the service showed clear progress. While some improvements required further embedding to ensure long‑term sustainability, there was a positive trajectory from a period of pressure and inconsistency to one of increased stability, responsiveness and improved outcomes for people.