Crann Mor Nursing Home

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

The provider had taken action to improve fire safety.

There were always enough suitably qualified staff on duty to keep people safe.

Staff understood any risks involved in people’s care and how best to minimise these.

Staff knew how to recognise the signs of abuse and understood their responsibilities to report any concerns.

The provider operated safe recruitment procedures.

People received their medicines safely and as prescribed.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People benefited from a culture in which adverse events were used as opportunities for learning and improvement.

The registered manager told us learning from incidents was shared with staff at handovers and team meetings.

There were processes in place to ensure learning was taken from events such as accidents and incidents.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People were supported by staff who understood their responsibilities to recognise and report abuse or poor practice.

Staff confirmed they had received safeguarding training. They were able to describe the potential signs of abuse and the action they would take if they observed these, including escalating concerns outside the service if necessary.

Staff understood how to keep people safe from harm while protecting their rights to privacy, dignity and choice.

All staff attended safeguarding in their induction and regular refresher training.

The provider had cooperated with the local authority to investigate the concerns raised by healthcare professionals and take action to address any shortfalls.

People were protected from harm because staff understood any risks involved in their care and how to minimise these.

Staff provided examples of how they mitigated risks while promoting people’s independence.

We observed that any equipment used in people’s care, such as slings and hoists, was suitable for their assessed needs.

Care plans contained risk assessments which recorded any risks involved in people’s care and the measures to mitigated them.

People were protected from the risk of fire because the provider had taken action to implement the requirements made by the Fire & Rescue Service following a visit to the service in April 2024.

The registered manager told us all staff had attended fire safety training and fire warden training within the last 12 months. This was confirmed by staff and the training records we checked.



The registered manager said the actions required by the Fire & Rescue Service had been completed and that the provider planned to obtain quotes for the replacement of the fire alarm system.

We observed that the environment was safe.

The Fire & Rescue Service had written to the provider on 30 April 2024 setting out actions necessary to improve standards of fire safety. These actions included improving the external emergency lighting and fire escape, carrying out regular fire drills and fire door checks, and reducing the size of protected areas.

A quality monitoring visit carried out by the local authority in June 2024 found the provider had made progress towards improving standards of fire safety, including testing fire doors each month, carrying out regular fire drills, and reviewing and updating the fire risk assessment. A fire safety folder was kept next to the fire alarm system on the ground floor which contained personal emergency evacuation plans (PEEPs) for each person.

By the time of our visit to the service, the provider had replaced the external emergency lighting and fire escape. Records of fire door tests, fire drills and staff fire training were being maintained.

There were enough suitably qualified staff on each shift to meet people’s needs and keep them safe.

Staff told us they were able to respond promptly when people needed care or support. They said they worked well as a team to ensure people’s needs were met promptly.

The registered manager told us the service was fully staffed and there was no use of agency staff.

We observed there were enough staff on duty to ensure people did not have to wait for care when they needed it.

Staffing levels were calculated based on people’s needs and kept under review to take account of any changes.

Staff attended an induction when they joined the team and had access to relevant ongoing training. The provider’s recruitment procedures helped ensure staff were suitable for their roles.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People’s medicines were managed safely. The medicine administration records (MARs) we checked were accurate and up to date. Each person’s MAR contained information about any medicines to which they were allergic, and guidance for the administration of any medicines prescribed 'as and when required' (PRN).

Where people were prescribed medicines to be taken covertly (without their knowledge), appropriate procedures had been followed to ensure this was in people’s best interests. However, there were not always clear instructions about how the medicines should be administered. We raised this issue in feedback with the registered manager, who took action to address it.

Staff who administered medicines told us they had attended relevant training and had annual assessments of their competency in medicines management.

There were appropriate procedures in place for the ordering, storage, administration and disposal of medicines. Medicines were audited regularly to identify any concerns and address any shortfalls.