Archived: Glenthorne House

We previous inspected Glenthorne House on 7 July 2015 and rated the provider to be Good in all five questions and Good overall.

Glenthorne House 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.

Glenthorne House provides accommodation and personal care for a maximum of 27 older people. On the first day of our inspection there were 26 people living at the home. Some people were living with dementia.

There was a manager working at the home who was in the process of applying for registration. The former manager had applied to de-register and remained to work at the home under a different role. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission 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.

People and their family members told us they received care and support which protected them from harm and abuse. Risks associated to people’s care were identified and measure put into place to reduce these. People received their medicines as prescribed by staff trained to administer them. There were sufficient staff on duty to provide the care and support people required and to meet their needs. The provider used safe systems to recruit new staff.

Provision had been made to reduce the risk of infection within the home. The provider had made improvements in the environment of the home and had plans to make further improvements in the future.

Staff received training and were supported by management to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to provide the care and support required. People were supported to make choices about how they spent their time in the least restrictive way possible.

People received care from staff who were kind and respectful and upheld their privacy and dignity. People were seen to participate in activities and events they enjoyed doing. People’s care was planned to reflect their preferences and wishes. Technology had been used to assist in the provision of care and support provided for people.

People enjoyed the food provided. Staff adapted how they communicated with people to ensure they were aware of choices available to them. People were asked their permission before they were supported and had their wishes respected.

Health and social care professionals were involved in people’s care and support as needed. The provider worked in partnership with other organisations to support people’s well-being.

Relatives were positive about the care and support their family member received. Their views and suggestions were taken into account and they were encouraged to participate in the care of their family member. People and their relatives knew how to complain about the service provided.

Once brought to the attention of the management improvements identified as part of the inspection were acted upon in relation to privacy locks and testing of electrical appliances.

We found that people were supported in making day to day decisions about the care they received. People's values were respected and promoted.

People received care which reflected their needs. One person told us, 'It's lovely. I've been here 12 months and I wouldn't change it'.

People were provided with enough to eat and were offered regular fluids throughout the day. One person told us, 'The food's good and you can always ask for more'.

We found that there were enough staff to care for people. Staff were skilled in delivering care and support.

The service had a clear complaints procedure. People were not always aware of the complaints procedure, but told us they were comfortable in speaking to staff about any issues that might arise.

We found that people were involved in making care decisions. One person told us that they were assisted to choose what clothes they wanted to wear by staff. We saw staff offered people food choices. Staff demonstrated good knowledge of people’s care plans, including those with specific care needs such as fragile skin areas. This meant that people’s care and welfare was promoted.

We found that the home’s environment was safe for people living there. The home had been recently extended, providing additional bedrooms. People told us that they felt safe at the home. One person told us, “it’s a nice home”.

We found that the home had sufficient staff on duty to ensure people’s care and welfare was promoted. Staff were appropriately skilled and well qualified to look after the needs of people at the home. One person told us that there were sometimes not enough staff to provide uninterrupted activities. One person told us that staff were, “kind you and care about you”.

We found that the provider gathered the opinions of people. We saw evidence that the home identified issues and took action to address concerns. This meant that the provider learnt from feedback and took steps that improved the service people received.