Archived: Glengarry Court Care Home

Rating at last inspection

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection. At this inspection we found the service Good. We found the registered provider continued to provide a good standard of care to people who lived at the home.

Why the service is rated Good

At this inspection we found the registered provider had systems to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and took action following each incident. Staff had received safeguarding training and understood their responsibilities to report unsafe care or abusive practices. The registered provider had reported incidents to the Care Quality Commission when required.

People told us staff were caring and respectful towards them. Staff we spoke with understood the importance of providing high standards of care and enabled people to lead valued lives. One relative told us, “They have given [family member] and me a new lease of life. I don’t feel I need to worry half as much as I did before. They will let me know if she is ever unwell straight away, the communication is great.”

We found there were sufficient numbers of staff during our inspection visit. They were effectively deployed, trained and able to deliver care in a compassionate and patient manner.

Staff we spoke with confirmed they did not commence in post until the management team completed relevant pre-recruitment checks. We checked staff records and noted employees received induction and training appropriate to their roles.

Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. Care records showed they were reviewed and any changes had been recorded.

We looked around the building and saw the home was clean and a safe place for people to live. We found equipment had been serviced and maintained as required. Staff wore protective clothing such as gloves and aprons when needed. This reduced the risk of cross infection.

Medication records provided staff with a good understanding about specific needs of each person who lived at Glengarry Court Care Home.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. Policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People told us they had plenty of food and drink with the option of additional snacks and drinks between meals.

We observed only positive interactions between staff and people who lived Glengarry Court. We observed humour used to foster positive relationships. There was a culture of promoting dignity and respect towards people. We saw staff spent time with people as they completed routine tasks.

There was a complaints procedure which was made available to people and visible within the home. People we spoke with, and visiting relatives, told us they were happy and had no complaints.

The management team used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included regular audits, staff meetings, unannounced visits and daily discussions with people who lived at the home to seek their views about the service provided.

People were supported with activities and social interaction but the registered manager also respected people’s right to not participate and supported people’s decision to opt out of activities.

The registered provider offered people dignified end of life support that included support to families and friends. People preferences related to end of life care were recorded and respected.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Glengarry Court Care Home provides accommodation for up to 17 people who require personal care. The home is situated in Poulton-le-Fylde, a small town close to the Lancashire coast. The shopping centre and local amenities are close by. There are two communal lounges at the home and a dining room on the ground floor. All bedrooms have en-suite facilities. A passenger lift provides access to the first floor. At the time of the inspection there were 11 people who lived at the home.

A registered manager was in place. 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.

At the last inspection in November 2013 we found the provider was meeting the requirements of the regulations inspected.

At this inspection we found the registered manager had systems in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take appropriate action when required. Staff had received safeguarding adults training and understood their responsibilities to report any unsafe care.

We found recruitment checks were carried out to ensure suitable people were employed to work at the home and there were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. This was confirmed by talking with staff members and looking at records of staff recruitment.

Medicines were administered in a safe manner and people received their medicines on time. Staff had received related training to so that medicines were administered correctly by knowledgeable staff. Controlled drugs were being administered at the time of the inspection visit. We found correct documentation was recorded to ensure accurate administration of controlled drugs.

The registered manager understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). This meant they were working within the law to support people who may lack capacity to make their own decisions.

Staff had received training and were knowledgeable about their roles and responsibilities. Staff told us access to training courses and opportunities to develop their skills was good.

We saw regular snacks and drinks were provided between meals to ensure people received adequate nutrition and hydration. We observed the lunch time meal which was well organised. People who required support to eat their meals were supported by staff who were caring and patient. The cook had information about people’s dietary needs and these were met. One person who lived at the home said about the quality of food, “The food is very good.”

We found people had access to healthcare professionals and their healthcare needs were met. On the day of our inspection visit we saw one person was supported by a staff member to attend a hospital appointment. This ensured the service had up to date information about the outcome of the person’s appointment.

We observed staff treated people with respect, patience and dignity. People we spoke with told us staff were caring and respectful.

There was a complaints policy in place, which was understood by staff. Information on the complaints procedure was available in the reception of the home.

The registered manager used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. We looked at a number of audits that had taken place. This ensured the service continued to be monitored and improvements made when they were identified.

People who lived at the home and relatives had opportunities to feed back to the registered manager about the quality of their care through surveys and meetings.