We carried out a review of the data available to us about Glenthorne House on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Glenthorne House, you can give feedback on this service.
Glenthorne House is a residential care home that provides personal and nursing care for up to 27 older people. The accommodation is provided in a single building, arranged over two floors, with communal facilities. At the time of our inspection, 26 people were using the service, some of whom were living with dementia.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People received their medicines as prescribed by trained and competent staff. However, there were some gaps in the recording of people’s topical creams.
People were protected from the risks of ill-treatment and abuse. Staff had been trained to recognise potential signs of abuse and understood what to do if they suspected any wrongdoing.
The provider had assessed the risks to people associated with their care and support. Staff were knowledgeable about these risks and knew what to do to minimise the potential for harm to people.
People were supported by enough staff who were available to assist them in a timely way. Staff had received training which enabled them to support people safely.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
People, and staff, felt Glenthorne House was well managed and were given opportunities to share feedback about the service. The manager and provider undertook regular checks to ensure the quality of care provided was good.
The provider made notifications to the Care Quality Commission in accordance with the law.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 15 June 2019).
Why we inspected
The inspection was prompted in part due to concerns received about the general care people received. A decision was made for us to inspect and examine those risks. We found no evidence during this inspection that people were at risk of harm from these concerns. Please see the safe and well-led sections of this report.
For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating. The overall rating for the service has remained as good, based on this inspection.
We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Glenthorne House on our website at www.cqc.org.uk
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
We found the following examples of good practice.
The provider had systems in place to screen visitors to the home for Covid-19 using a lateral flow test. The registered manager maintained an up to date visiting policy which included a booking system to manage the numbers of visitors at any one time. Video and telephone calls were also used to help people stay in touch with their loved ones. The registered manager ensured people, relatives and staff were informed of procedures and why these were important. Staff used personal protective equipment in line with government guidance and were observed using this correctly. People were able to go out to appointments and visits and were supported to return safely using testing. Admissions to the home were managed safely, in line with government guidance and a deep clean of the room was completed at the end of the isolation period. Touch point cleaning was in place and the home environment had been adapted to support social distancing through movement of furniture. The registered manager worked with local agencies to ensure procedures were effective.
We found the following examples of good practice.
¿ There was a visiting protocol in place. On arrival visitors were asked to complete a short health questionnaire, consent to a lateral flow test (LFT) and their temperatures recorded. The checks will help to ensure visits take place safely in line with current guidance. There was a separate testing area set up for visitors to take their LFT before they were admitted into the home.
¿ Where possible staff encouraged people to keep a safe distance from each other and there was additional cleaning of touch points in communal areas to mitigate the risk of cross infection.
¿ New admissions into the home followed government guidance. People were requested to isolate in their bedrooms for 14 days and, on a daily basis, the same staff members were allocated to that person to reduce the risk of cross infection.
¿ Staff were observed on the day to wear their PPE correctly and in line with government guidance.
¿ Staff taking breaks were limited to one at a time.
¿ The service kept in regular contact with family members through social media, phone calls and newsletters. A video had been recorded for new admissions to the home so they could view their bedroom and family members could see where their relative would be staying.
¿ The home adhered to government guidance when disposing of clinical waste and the management of laundry.
People’s experience of using this service:
People at Glenthorne House were valued as individuals and treated with kindness and compassion. Staff knew each person well and engaged positively with people throughout the day. Staff knew how to communicate with people, so people understood the options available to them.
People lived in a service that kept them safe. Staff had been recruited safely and had received training on how to recognise and report abuse. People were supported to take their medicines safely. Audits and checks were carried out, so any problem could be identified and rectified.
Staff promoted people’s dignity and privacy. Staff understood their responsibilities to protect people from abuse and discrimination. They knew to report any concerns and ensure action was taken.
People’s and relatives’ views were sought, and opportunities taken to improve the service. Staff were supervised, supported and clear about what was expected of them. People’s care was provided in line with best practice. People were cared for by staff who received regular training that was tailored to meet the needs of the people living in the service.
People’s needs and preferences regarding food and drink were known and respected. People were supported to have access to healthcare services. Staff recognised deterioration in people's health and sought professional advice appropriately and followed it.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
The provider had identified improvements were needed in the social activities at the home. They had employed an activity person to put in place meaningful activities for people to aid both their physical and emotional well-being.
People knew how to make a complaint if necessary. They said if they had a concern or complaint they would feel happy to raise it.
There was nobody receiving end of life care at the home during our inspection. Procedures were in place for people to identify their wishes for their end-of-life care. This included any wishes they had for receiving future treatment or being resuscitated.
A system of audits and monitoring had been carried out. The provider and the interim manager had identified gaps in practice or required improvements and were implementing an improvement plan.
Rating at last inspection: This is the first inspection of the service since it was registered to the current provider in May 2018.
Why we inspected: This was a scheduled/planned comprehensive inspection based on the date of registration.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received, we may inspect sooner.
The service met the characteristics for a rating of "good" in all the key questions we inspected. Therefore, our overall rating for the service after this inspection was "good".
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk