We carried out a review of the data available to us about Glenthorne Rest Home Limited 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 Rest Home Limited, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
Visitors were required to follow best practice guidance and wear appropriate protective personal equipment (PPE). Their visiting policies had been discussed with staff and relatives and agreed. One member of staff said, “We have very good infection control procedures and are well supported by [owner] to support residents.”
The service had dedicated staff to ensure people were received safely and continued to be supported in the service in accordance with national guidance. They supported people and their relatives to understand the policies and procedures surrounding protection against COVID 19, the isolation processes and how the service could help them to keep people safe.
We observed signage around the home to guide staff on the use of protective personal equipment (PPE). Processes were in place for staff to put on, take off and dispose of PPE when entering and leaving the premises. We observed staff wearing PPE appropriately, one staff member said, “We are supported to take regular breaks, so we keep well and able to support residents safely.” Audits were in place and we found them to be up to date to ensure infection prevention procedures were robust and the home monitored regularly.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
Glenthorne Rest Home provides residential care for 18 older people. At the time of the inspection there were 15 people living at the home. The home is situated within a residential area of central Blackpool and is close to Stanley Park and the town centre. Car parking is available at the front of the home on a private forecourt. Accommodation within the home is situated on the ground and first floors. There is a stair lift providing access to the first floor.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were protected from the risk of abuse and kept safe by staff who were aware of safeguarding processes and had training to inform them. The registered manager recorded and audited any incidents and accidents and learnt from them. People were supported to manage risks in their daily lives and they were recorded in care records. Staff continued to be recruited safely with sufficient numbers of staff to support people to be independent as they could be. Medicines continued to be managed and stored safely. Infection control systems and audits were completed to ensure a clean environment and reduce any risks of infection. The registered manager ensured safety checks of the home environment were completed regularly.
The registered manager ensured staff received an effective induction and training programme that was continually updated. One staff member said, “Great induction all the staff were very helpful and still are.” People spoke positively about the quality of meals provided and praised staff for the standard, quantity of food and drinks throughout the day. People received support with their healthcare needs promptly. 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 were treated well, and they told us staff respected their wishes and choices. One person said, “The staff and manager are so nice and will do anything to make you feel better and treat me with kindness” We received positive feedback about the caring and sensitive approach of staff and how they felt respected. The registered manager provided information about local advocacy services, to ensure they could access support to express their views if required.
People told us staff knew them well and provided care that reflected their needs and choices. Activities were varied, and people told us there were trips and entertainment regularly provided. Evidence of this was found during the inspection visit. Staff offered people choices and encouraged them to make decisions about their care. People’s communication needs had been assessed and needs were identified these had been met. No complaints had been raised since the last inspection.
The management team were clear about their roles and obligations to people and provided care which resulted in good outcomes for them. They worked in partnership with different agencies to ensure people’s health and social needs were met. The registered manager continued to use a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service on a regular basis and make improvements where needed.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at the last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 01 March 2017)
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating
Follow up: The next scheduled inspection will be in keeping with the overall rating. We will continue to monitor information we receive from and about the service. We may inspect sooner if we receive concerning information about the service.
Glenthorne Care Home Ltd provides residential care for 18 older people. At the time of the inspection there were 16 people living at the home. The home is situated within a residential area of central Blackpool and is close to Stanley Park and the town centre. Car parking is available at the front of the home on a private forecourt. Accommodation within the home is situated on the ground and first floors. There is a stair lift providing access to the first floor.
At the last inspection in November 2014 the service was rated ‘Good’. At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’.
The registered manager had systems in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take action when required. Recruitment checks were carried out to ensure suitable people were employed to work at the home. Our observations and discussions with staff and people who lived at the home confirmed sufficient staff were on duty both day and night.
Risk assessments had been put in place and were individual to the person assessed. This was to minimise potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care and support. These had been reviewed on a regular basis and were relevant to care provided.
We had a walk around the building and found it had been maintained, was clean and hygienic and a safe place for people to live. We found equipment had been serviced and maintained as required.
We found medication procedures at the home were safe. Staff responsible for the administration of medicines had received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required. Medicines were safely kept with appropriate arrangements for storing.
The registered manager understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). This meant they were working within the law to support people who may lack capacity to make their own decisions.
We observed regular snacks and drinks throughout the day were provided between meals to make sure people received adequate nutrition and hydration. Comments from people who lived at the home were all positive about the quality of meals provided. One person said, “It’s perfectly OK, I’ve got no complaints about it.”
We found people had access to healthcare professionals and their healthcare needs were met.
People who lived at the home told us they were encouraged to participate in a range of activities that had been organised. We had a mixed response about activities and entertainment provided. One person who lived at the home said, “They should have a bit of entertainment like a bingo session.” Others spoke with told us the afternoons were when staff put on activities such as games and music sessions.
People who used the service and their relatives knew how to raise a concern or to make a complaint. The complaints procedure was available and people said they were encouraged to raise concerns. No complaints had been recorded over the last 12 months.
The registered manager/owner used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of care at Glenthorne. These included regular audits of the service, annual surveys, resident meetings and staff meetings to seek the views of people about the quality of care at the home.
The inspection visit at Glenthorne Care Home took place on 4th November 2014 and was unannounced.
Glenthorne Care Home Ltd provides residential care for 18 older people. The home is situated within a residential area of central Blackpool and is close to Stanley Park and the town centre. Car parking is available at the front of the home on a private forecourt. Accommodation within the home is situated on the ground and first floors. There is a stair lift providing access to the first floor.
There was a registered manager in place. 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 who lived at the home told us they felt safe, protected and well cared for. Comments from people who lived at the home included, “It’s a lovely cosy home with good people around, I feel safe and secure.” Also, “It’s nice to have plenty of people around it makes you feel safe.” A relative said, “My [relative] looked after here. I go away feeling [relative] is well cared for and safe.”
Care staff prepared the meals daily. All had completed relevant food and hygiene courses which were up to date. One person who lived at the home said about the quality of meals, “The staff do an excellent job with the meals always plenty to eat and a choice.” We observed snacks and drinks served at regular intervals during the day.
Procedures and policies were in place to ensure staff were recruited with thorough checks completed. This reduced the risk of unsuitable staff being employed. One staff member said, “I was not allowed to start work until everything had been checked. It was a long process but definitely necessary.”
We observed medicines being administrated. We found that medicines were administered safely, at the right time and as prescribed. Only trained staff gave out medication and medication records were up to date and accurate.
People’s care and support needs had been assessed before they moved into the home. Care records we looked at contained details of people’s preferences, interests, likes and dislikes. Relatives we spoke with told us they had been consulted about their relatives care and were informed of any changes that occurred. People who lived at the home told us their views and choices were listened to by the staff and registered manager. One relative said, “They keep me well informed of [relatives] care.”
Health and social care professionals we spoke with were positive about the care and support the service provided for people. District nurses told us when they visited the home, care records were always up to date and accurate. They said the staff were caring and supportive and never had any issues with the service.
The registered manager was aware of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 for people who lacked capacity to make a decision and the she had previously made an application under the Mental Capacity Act (MCA), Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) for authorisation in the case of one person whose liberty had been restricted.
There were sufficient skilled and experienced staff on duty to care for people. We looked at training records and found an ongoing programme of training, supervision and appraisal to support staff to meet people’s needs.
There were quality assurance systems in place to monitor and improve the care, support and running of the service. For example ,regular audits were carried out by the registered manager such as care records, the building and fire procedures. The registered manager told us any issues that were highlighted from the audits would be looked into and put into practice if it was to the benefit of the home.
We received an action plan from the registered manager. This detailed the procedures put in place to address the minor concerns, in relation to formal supervision of staff.
At our visit on the 24th June 2013, we found that all staff had received formal learning and performance reviews.
The Care Quality Commission (CQC) had been contacted during the inspection process, by people who wished to express a range of concerns, in particular that there was insufficient staff on duty. On the day of the inspection we looked at staff rotas. We also spoke with staff, residents and family members who confirmed that there was enough staff on duty to support people living at the home.
We spoke with people who lived at the home. They told us they could express their views and were involved in making decisions about their care. They told us they felt listened to when discussing their care needs. Staff confirmed to us they also involved relatives, where possible to ensure people received the right care and support.
We spent time in areas of the home, including the lounge and the dining areas. This helped us to observe the daily routines and gain an insight into how peoples care and support was being managed. Staff treated people with respect and ensured their privacy when supporting them. They provided support or attention as people requested it. We spoke with people about the care and support they received. They said they were happy living at the home and said that staff were polite and kind.