The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Glynn Court Residential Home

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Fryern Court Road, Burgate, Fordingbridge, Hampshire, SP6 1NG (01425) 652349

Provided and run by:
Oakray Care (Glynn Court) Ltd

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

All Inspections

During an assessment under our new approach

We conducted our inspection from 20 to 30 January 2026. We inspected the service due to concerns we received about the support people received when anxious or distressed. We assessed all 33 quality statements. The service is a care home without nursing, supporting up to 31 younger adults and older people, some of whom were living with dementia. At the time of the inspection, 23 people were living at the service. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) only inspects where people receive personal care. This means help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided.

The provider was in breach of 5 regulations in relation to: safe care and treatment; staffing; consent; person-centred care; and good governance. You can find more details of our concerns in the quality statement findings.

The provider did not ensure safe care and treatment for people. Care records demonstrated risks were not managed safely. Medicines were not managed safely. The service did not always manage the risk of infection safely. We found concerns in relation to hand washing facilities and unclean flooring.

The environment was not safe. We found concerns in relation to equipment being stored in communal areas which posed a trip hazard to people. Doors to unsafe areas not always being locked. Fire alarm testing did not consistently take place weekly.

Recruitment was not always carried out in line with Schedule 3 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) 2014. Medicines were not always managed safely.

The provider did not ensure people had good person-centered care. People had limited access to activities. The dining room was not being used, meaning people had to eat meals in their bedrooms or the lounge, and care plans and risk assessments did not contain sufficient person-centered information.

Governance was not managed effectively. The provider had identified all the concerns we found on inspection. Where some concerns had been identified in provider audits, they had failed to address these satisfactorily.

Staff were kind and caring, treated people with dignity and respect and knew people well.

The registered manager was responsive to the concerns raised on inspection and started to update care plans during the inspection.

12 February 2018

During a routine inspection

Glynn Court Residential Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation, nursing and/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 home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 31 older people some of whom were living with dementia and/or physical health needs. At the time of our inspection there were 27 people living at the home. The main house accommodation is split over two floors. Most of the bedrooms are on the ground floor with a staircase and chairlift to two first floor bedrooms and a bathroom. There is a large lounge and separate dining room on the ground floor. There is also a separate two storey house with six bedrooms and a lounge for people who are able to live more independently. The home has a large garden which is accessible for people who have mobility needs.

The inspection was unannounced and was carried out on 12 February 2018 by a lead inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is someone who has experience of using, or caring for someone who uses this type of service. The lead inspector returned on 16 February 2018 to complete the inspection.

There were two registered managers in place who jointly managed the home. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the home. 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 home is run.

People were protected from abuse. Staff knew how to identify abuse and how to report any concerns. People, their relatives, staff and healthcare professionals told us they thought people were safe.

Recruitment procedures were safe and ensured only suitable staff were employed. Sufficient staff were deployed during each shift to keep people safe and meet their needs.

People’s medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines from staff who were trained and regularly checked for their competency to do so.

Risks relating to people’s health and welfare had been identified and assessed and measures were in place to reduce these. Environmental risks were assessed and urgent maintenance issues were attended to promptly. Some minor repairs and redecoration was required. The registered managers and maintenance staff were waiting to hear if an increase in maintenance hours had been approved by the provider. Plans to manage emergency evacuations were in place and understood by staff.

People’s rights were protected because staff understood and followed the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Deprivation of liberty safeguards had been submitted to the local authority for authorisation when required.

People were supported to maintain their health and well-being and had access to a range of health care services, such as GPs, opticians and chiropodists, when required. Other specialist advice was requested to support people with specific condition, such as diabetes and swallowing difficulties.

Staff received regular training, supervision and appraisal which included observations of their practice. This ensured they remained competent to support people effectively.

People had a choice of nutritious food and drink that met their specific dietary needs and preferences. When appropriate, staff provided physical assistance to people to eat in a calm and unhurried manner.

Staff were kind and caring and treated people with dignity and respect. Staff knew people and their relatives well and visitors were made welcome at any time.

Care plans included details of people’s life histories and personal preferences about how they would like to receive their care. People and their relatives were involved in planning and reviewing their care.

People were encouraged to take part in a range of activities which included quizzes and games.

The provider was working towards meeting the Accessible Information Standard. Staff used a variety of ways to communicate with people such as pictures, gestures and body language which supported informed decision making.

Systems, such as spot checks and audits, were in place to monitor and assess the quality and safety of the care provided and drive improvement. There were informal opportunities for people and relatives to feedback their views about their care. People and relatives knew who to speak to if they had a complaint.

There was a positive, supportive and open culture within the home. Staff felt supported and involved in the development of the service. The registered managers understood their responsibilities to notify CQC of relevant events in the service.