Background to this inspection
Updated
10 March 2020
The inspection
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team
Our inspection was completed by one inspector and one inspection manager.
Service and service type
Glenside is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.
Notice of inspection
This inspection was unannounced.
What we did before the inspection
The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.
We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. This included statutory notifications that the provider had sent us. A statutory notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.
We contacted the health and social care commissioners who monitor the care and support that people receive.
We used all this information to plan our inspection.
During the inspection we spoke with three people who used the service and four relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with nine members of staff including the provider, registered manager, care workers, and the hotel staff. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.
We reviewed a range of records. This included two people’s full care records and multiple medication records. We looked at two staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.
Updated
10 March 2020
About the service
Glenside is a residential care home that can provide long and short-term residential care for up to 30 younger and older adults with dementia and mental health needs. At the time of inspection 20 people were using the service
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
Staff did not have restraint training.
Some individual risks assessments for people lacked clear up to date information, however risks to people’s safety and well-being were understood by staff.
Not all staff and relatives felt there were enough staff on duty at times, however we saw evidence that call bells were responded to within short time frames on the day of inspection.
Care plans did not always include the information of which professional had made a recommendation linked to people’s care or contain the required information to ensure staff could respond to a specific need. However, staff knew people well and could tell us people’s needs, wishes and expectations.
People were not supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not support this practice.
The provider had effective safeguarding and whistleblowing systems and policies and staff were knowledgeable about the types of abuse and the actions they should take if they had any concerns that people were at risk.
People were protected against the employment of unsuitable staff. The provider followed safe staff recruitment procedures.
Medicines were managed safely, medicines were administered as prescribed.
People told us the staff team were kind and caring, and we saw staff interacting with people in a patient manner and promoting independence
The registered manager worked in an open and transparent way when incidents occurred at the service in line with their responsibilities under the duty of candour.
The registered manager had systems in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service, and audits to monitor the environment and equipment had been carried out.
The registered manager evaluated their interactions with relatives, staff and other professionals through questionnaires and made changes to practice and operations where necessary.
We have made a recommendation about risk assessments.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update.
The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 17 November 2017).
The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve.
At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations 12, 14 and 15.
However enough improvement had not been made and the provider was still in breach of regulation 17.
The service remains rated requires improvement.
Why we inspected
This inspection was carried out to follow up on action we told the provider to take at the last inspection.
We have found evidence the provider needs to make improvements. Please see the Safe, effective, responsive and well led sections of this report.
Enforcement
We have identified breaches in relation to restraint, mental capacity assessments and good governance.
Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.
Follow up
We will meet with the provider following this report being published to discuss how they will make changes to ensure they improve their rating to at least good. We will work with the local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.