Archived: Glebe Court Nursing Home

We found the following examples of good practice.

¿The provider had appropriate arrangements in place for visiting to help prevent the spread of Covid 19. All visitors were required to wash their hands and were screened for symptoms of acute respiratory infection before being allowed to enter the home. They were supported to follow the government’s guidance on wearing personal protective equipment (PPE) and social distancing.

¿The provider ensured that people using the service could maintain links with family members and friends.

People were supported to have visits from their relatives and friends in a designated area [Visiting Pod] where social distancing was observed. Visits were booked in advance and the Pod was cleaned

between visits.

¿The provider had appropriate arrangements to test people and staff for Covid 19 and was following

government guidance on testing. There was a designated team of nursing staff that carried out all testing on people using the service and staff. This ensured that people and staff were tested for Covid 19 in a consistent way. Black, Asian and minority ethnic Covid 19 risk assessments were carried out with people using the service and staff to ensure they could live and work safely at the home.

¿The provider ensured that staff received appropriate training and support to manage Covid 19. All staff had received training on Covid 19, infection control and the use of PPE.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

At our last inspection of the service on 13 and 14 September 2016 we found the service to be meeting regulatory requirements and was rated 'Good'. Glebe Court Nursing Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Glebe Court Nursing Home provides personal and nursing care support for up to 51 older people some of whom have a physical disability or sensory impairment and may be living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 46 people using the service. The home had a registered manager in post. However they had recently left the service and a new manager had been appointed and was applying to the CQC to become the registered manager. 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.

Risks to people were assessed and recorded, and staff acted to manage identified risks safely. Medicines were managed, administered and stored safely. People were protected from the risk of abuse, because staff were aware of the types of abuse and the action to take if they had any concerns. There were systems in place to ensure people were protected from the risk of infection. Accidents and incidents were recorded and acted on appropriately. There were safe staff recruitment practices in place and appropriate numbers of staff were deployed throughout the home to meet people’s needs.

There were processes in place to ensure staff new to the home were inducted into the service appropriately. Staff received training, supervision and appraisals that enabled them to fulfil their roles effectively. Staff were aware of the importance of seeking consent from people and demonstrated an understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff were also aware of the conditions under which a person may be deprived or their liberty, and acted in accordance with the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards, to ensure people were only lawfully deprived when this was in their best interests. People’s nutritional needs and preferences were met and people had access to health and social care professionals when required.

People told us staff treated them with kindness and their privacy and dignity were respected. People were involved in day to day decisions about their care and had care plans in place which reflected their individual needs and preferences. People were supported to maintain relationships with relatives and friends. There was a range of activities available to meet people’s interests and to promote stimulation. The service provided appropriate care and support to people at the end of their lives. People’s needs were reviewed and monitored on a regular basis. People were provided with information on how to make a complaint. The service worked with health and social care professionals to ensure people’s needs were met and the home made connections with people within the local community. There were regular volunteers who supported and facilitated entertainment and activities within the home.

People and relatives were aware of how to make a complaint and expressed confidence any concerns would be addressed by the management. There were robust systems and processes in place to monitor and evaluate the service provided. People’s views about the service were sought and considered through residents meetings and satisfaction surveys. People, relatives and staff spoke highly of the management, and told us the service had improved in recent months.

Glebe Court Nursing Home provides residential and nursing care for up to 51 older people and is situated in the London borough of Bromley. At the time of our inspection the home was providing support to 46 people. The home had a registered manager in post. 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.

At this inspection we found the provider was compliant with the requirements of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014.

Risks to the health and safety of people using the service were identified, assessed and reviewed in line with the provider's policy. Medicines were managed, administered and stored safely. There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies. There were safeguarding adult’s policies and procedures in place. Accidents and incidents were recorded and acted on appropriately. There were safe staff recruitment practices in place and appropriate numbers of staff were deployed throughout the home to meet people’s needs.

There were processes in place to ensure staff new to the home were inducted into the service appropriately. Staff received training, supervision and appraisals that enabled them to fulfil their roles effectively. There were systems in place which ensured the service complied with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA 2005). This provides protection for people who do not have capacity to make decisions for themselves. People’s nutritional needs and preferences were met and people had access to health and social care professionals when required.

People were treated with respect and were consulted about their care and support needs. Staff respected people’s dignity and privacy. People were supported to maintain relationships with relatives and friends. People’s support needs and risks were identified, assessed and documented within their care plan. People’s needs were reviewed and monitored on a regular basis. People were provided with information on how to make a complaint. The service worked with health and social care professionals to ensure people’s needs were met.

There were robust systems and processes in place to monitor and evaluate the service provided. People’s views about the service were sought and considered through residents meetings and satisfaction surveys.

We found that there were adequate staff on duty and there was no evidence after we gained entry to the home to support the allegation. We found that people had access to call buzzers and that documentation had been completed to suggest that people had received the appropriate care.

People's needs were assessed and care was planned and regularly reviewed, however we found that sometimes care plans did not always reflect the care provided. The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service and most care plans were clear and legible and records were stored securely.

We found that the people who used the service were involved in their care planning and received a personalised care and support which was based on an assessment of their needs. Staff received support and training in different aspects of care and demonstrated an understanding of safeguarding of vulnerable adults.