You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 26 February 2020

About the service:

Green Tree Court is a care home with nursing and is registered to provide accommodation and support for a maximum of 68 people. The service is divided into three units, Larch, Willow and Maple. Willow is designed for people living with dementia, while the other units provide for general nursing care. Both units provide long term and respite care. At the time of our inspection there were 49 people living across the three units.

Green Tree Court is a purpose-built service, registered with CQC in 2014.

People’s experience of using this service:

We identified some concerns over medicines practice. These included staff carrying out medicines practice that was not in accordance with their medicines policy, and a staff member using one person’s prescribed thickening agent to thicken another person’s drink. We also found instances where some medicines were not being clearly evaluated for their effectiveness, for example in reducing pain. No-one was harmed by these concerns, and the service’s management took immediate action to resolve them.

On the inspection, although we found staff were caring towards people, and had in many instances gone ‘above and beyond’ what would have been expected to support them, we also found some communication was not always supportive of people’s well-being. This was discussed with the management team, who took immediate action. In other instances, we saw people received positive and enhancing support from dedicated, motivated and compassionate staff.

Green Tree Court has won several high-level awards since their registration, including Care Home of the year 2018 in the National Care Awards. People living at Green Tree Court experienced a high quality environment, that was purpose built, and had been awarded a Gold Standard from Stirling University for their environment for people living with dementia. The dementia unit was calm, happy and uplifting, despite there being people there who had previously shown distressed or anxious behaviours. People had space to walk purposefully without feeling constrained or confined, and the peaceful environment contributed to their well-being. A children’s playground had been provided to encourage children to visit. The building had been designed with an awareness of their impact on the environment.

The registered manager said they wanted the service to feel ‘like a five-star hotel’, which people said was being achieved. The service had a spa, library, gymnasium, and fine dining restaurants. Rooms and communal areas were very well furnished, clean and spacious, with areas where people could help themselves to drinks, fruit and pastries throughout the day. In house therapy teams could demonstrate how they supported people’s health and well-being to improve. People’s meals were of a high quality, with restaurant style dining, or more homely presentation as people wanted.

There was an established management team at the service, with unit heads who worked alongside care staff each day. Quality assurance systems and regular audits were in place to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service provided. Effective communication systems were in place, from director level to all staff. The service was participating in research projects to help better understand and deliver exceptional care and support to people.

Risks to people from living with long term health conditions were assessed. These included risks such as from falls, poor nutrition or pressure ulcers, and included actions taken to mitigate risks where possible. People were supported and encouraged to take risks, and remain in control of their lives, supported by thoughtful and reflective practice.

Systems were in place to safeguard people from abuse, and the service responded quickly to any concerns or complaints about people’s wellbeing. Where people did not wish to follow plans to reduce risks this was clearly documented. The service learned from incidents to preven

Inspection areas


Requires improvement

Updated 26 February 2020

The service was not always safe

Details are in our Safe findings below.



Updated 26 February 2020

The service was effective

Details are in our Effective findings below.



Updated 26 February 2020

The service was caring

Details are in our Caring findings below.



Updated 26 February 2020

The service was responsive

Details are in our Responsive findings below.



Updated 26 February 2020

The service was well-led.

Details are in our Well-Led findings below.