Glenfield Woodlands Care Home

Updated 28 November 2023

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of this inspection we looked at the infection control and prevention measures in place. This was conducted so we can understand the preparedness of the service in preventing or managing an infection outbreak, and to identify good practice we can share with other services.

Inspection team

The service was inspected by 2 inspectors and 1 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.

Service and service type

Glenfield Woodlands is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing and/or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement dependent on their registration with us. Glenfield Woodlands is a care home without nursing care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Registered Manager

This provider is required to have a registered manager to oversee the delivery of regulated activities at this location. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Registered managers and providers are legally responsible for how the service is run, for the quality and safety of the care provided and compliance with regulations.

At the time of our inspection, there was a registered manager in post. However, the provider told us the registered manager had terminated their employment with immediate effect, shortly before our inspection of the service, and they would be actively looking to recruit for the position. A manager from another service and the Nominated Individual were providing managerial support to the service in the absence of the registered manager. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider.

Notice of inspection

The first day of inspection was unannounced. We gave approximately 20 hours’ notice for the second day of the inspection.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We visited the service on 2 separate days to complete the inspection. We checked the environment on each site visit. We spoke with 7 people living at the service and 3 relatives, to gain feedback on their experiences of using the service. We spoke with 9 staff including the nominated individual. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider. We reviewed a selection of records including 14 people's care files, and multiple medicine records. We looked at 4 staff files in relation to recruitment and reviewed the providers training and supervision monitoring documents. A variety of records relating to the management of the service including, quality checks, policy and procedures, and health and safety were examined.

Updated 28 November 2023

About the service

Glenfield Woodlands is a residential care home providing personal care to up to 17 people. The service provides support to older people and people living with dementia. At the time of our inspection there were 16 people using the service.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Risk assessments did not always ensure people’s safety in relation to falls. We were not assured infection prevention and control measures were sufficient to protect people from the spread of harmful bacteria.

Medicines were not always safely administered, and people were not always protected through the effective use of the providers safeguarding system.

People were supported by enough staff, and safe recruitment checks were in place. The provider was responsive to concerns raised during our inspection and took action to improve safety and quality of care.

People’s dignity and respect was not always promoted by staff, and there was a lack of daily activities. Staff competency and people’s needs were not always fully assessed. People were not always provided with meal options during mealtimes, and fluid monitoring was not always effective to ensure people drank enough.

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.

Quality assurance systems and service oversight was not always effective. The nominated individual had a good understanding of their legal responsibilities in relation to duty of candour.

People and their families spoke positively about the care staff and the atmosphere at the service. Feedback from staff indicated they enjoyed working at the service and felt valued by the provider. Staff had opportunity to raise concerns and receive guidance during supervision with their line manager. Staff told us they felt comfortable raising concerns.

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 5 March 2019).

Why we inspected

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 that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

We received concerns in relation to medicines, moving and handling, care planning and meeting people’s dietary needs. As a result, we undertook a focused inspection to review the key questions of Safe, Effective and Well-led only.

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 changed from Good to Requires Improvement based on the findings of this inspection.

We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements. Please see the Safe, Effective and Well-led sections of this full report. You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Glenfield Woodlands on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Enforcement and Recommendations

We have identified breaches in relation to safety, respect and dignity, and governance at this inspection. We issued warning notices to the provider for regulation breaches related to safety and governance, requiring the provider to become compliant with these regulations.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Follow up

We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.