Glendon House

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

Care plans included person centred information from people and their families, which started on admission with the detailed pre-admission assessment and then reviewed as part of the ‘Resident of the Day’ process.

People and their relatives felt they were involved in their care and decisions about it. One relative said they felt, ‘Fully involved even though we don’t live in Norfolk. It certainly feels like personal care.’

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

Staff worked collaboratively within the teams and with external professionals to deliver integrated support aligned with each person’s assessed needs. Care records reflected this co-ordinated approach with detailed records of professional’s contacts.

There were links within the local community with local schools who visited and did Christmas performances and sung Carols for sing-alongs. The local pastor visited the service to conduct services and the Sunday morning services from the Church were streamed for people to watch. The manager organised bingo at a local hall and a summer fete in the garden which raised monies for the amenities fund. This fund was used for amenities such as the barbers shop, animal therapy, entertainers and outings. It was also used to make birthdays extra special. They also fund raised for charities.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs. However, we did not always see these being used. One person did not speak English. Their care plans covering communication referred to, as part of this, the use of flash cards and an online translation service. However, we did not observe staff using this. The flash cards were kept in their bedroom whilst they were in the communal areas. The registered manager, during our inspection, created flash cards on a key ring which staff could have with them at all times, to help staff give reassurance when the person was anxious and the meals picture cards had the word in their native language added to aid their understanding. They had also tried to link into the voluntary sector for support which they could offer.

There were posters displayed around the service about how to make a complaint, making safeguarding referrals and also displaying forthcoming events ensuring people, visitors and staff had clear access to important information and knew how to raise concerns.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people and their relatives in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The registered manager was approachable and had an office near to the entrance of the service so they were accessible. People and relatives were confident in talking and raising any concerns with the manager and felt they would be listened to and concerns acted upon.

Resident and relative questionnaires had regularly been sent out, with the last one being in February 2026, which we reviewed. The responses were overwhelmingly positive about the care received and the service. There were also mealtime questionnaires to gain feedback on the food.

There was a complaints process in place and posters displaying who to contact within the service ensuring people and visitors knew how to raise concerns and seek resolution.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

Referrals were made to services when appropriate which were monitored to ensure timely responses. There was 7 day a week management cover to ensure continuity of support to staff and people living in the service.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

One person with poor visibility had raised letters on their bedroom door so they could recognise their room by touch, supporting independence and orientation. Blue dignity plates were used at mealtimes for people with visual impairment, and specialised cutlery was available for those with reduced mobility, helping people eat more independently, maintain dignity, and reducing the risk of frustration or poor nutrition.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

The manager recognised making decisions about a person’s end of life was difficult or some people were not in a position to make those decisions, so they covered this sensitively. The activities lead spent time with people and would find out their preferences for flowers and hymns as part of activities they were doing to help inform relatives for when this was needed.

People had Recommended Summary Plan for Emergency Care and Treatment (ReSPECT) forms in place, which relatives had been involved with. These create a summary of personalised recommendations for a person’s clinical care in a future emergency in which they were not able to make decisions or express wishes.

One relative whose family member had passed at the service said, ‘My relative’s end of life care was brilliant.’