Archived: Glenmoor House Nursing Home

Updated 15 January 2015

This inspection was conducted on 22 July 2014 and was unannounced. This meant the provider did not know we were coming. The inspection team consisted of one inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection, we reviewed all the information we hold about the provider including the Provider Information Return (PIR) which we had asked the provider to complete. This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed statutory notifications. This is important information about events that occur at the service which the provider is required by law to inform us about.

Not everyone who used the service was able to talk with us. This was due to their complex communication skills. We were able to speak with 10 people. We used a number of observations, spoke with staff, and looked at care records and other information to help us assess how their care needs were being met.

We looked at four peoples care records, recruitment files, training and supervision spread sheets. Other records we looked at included complaints, quality monitoring and audit information, health and safety and fire records.

Updated 15 January 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and to pilot a new inspection process being introduced by CQC which looks at the overall quality of the service

The last time we inspected the service was 17 September 2013, we found the service not to be in breach of the regulations assessed.

Glenmoor Nursing Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 59 people, some who are living with dementia. On the day of the inspection there were 58 people using the service

There was a registered manager in post at the time of this inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

This was an unannounced inspection. This meant that the provider was not aware of when we were inspecting the service.

CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. We saw that there were policies, procedures and information available in relation to the MCA and DoLS to ensure that people who could not make decisions for themselves were protected. The registered manager told us there was no one living in the home currently who required a referral, as no one was having any restrictions imposed. We saw no evidence to suggest that anyone living at the home was being deprived of their liberty.

People’s healthcare needs were assessed, and care planned and delivered in a consistent way. We found from the records we looked at that the information and guidance to staff was clear. It enabled them to provide appropriate and consistent care. Risks had been assessed and plans were in place to minimise the risk as far as is possible to keep people safe.

Staff understood how people wished to be supported. There were appropriate numbers and skilled staff on duty to provide people with the care and support required.

Staff received appropriate on-going training and support to enable them to understand and meet people’s diverse needs and ensure people were protected and safe.

People’s privacy and dignity was respected. Staff knocked on people’s doors and asked permission before providing any personal care.

People’s preferred daily routines had been recorded in their care plans and we saw that staff respected these.

The social and daily activities provided suited peoples individuals needs and choices. People were able to choose if they took part or not.

An effective complaints procedure was in place. People could therefore feel confident that any concerns they had would be listened to and acted upon.

There were a number of monitoring audits in place to assess the quality and safety of the service. People using the service, families and staff were consulted in the running and improving the quality of the service.

The management team at the service were well established and provided good and consistent leadership.