Glenister Gardens

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

The service was well led. The provider had a range of audits and quality assurance tools in place to monitor the quality of care being delivered. Managers worked with staff to help ensure staff had the training and information required to provide a good level of care. We did not assess all the quality statements within this key question, as we did not identify concerns in the areas we judged as being met at our last inspection.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider’s goals included supporting people in a way that encouraged them to maintain their independence and achieve what was important to them and their wellbeing. Care plans were person centred and staff supported people in a respectful and inclusive way. One staff member explained after training in a particular area, “I can see from [the person’s] perspective, and I can understand what they are doing and how to help.” Staff told us they enjoyed working at the service. There had been recent changes with a new manager, but they felt supported and could speak with the manager if they needed to. A staff member confirmed, “I feel really glad as we have a really good team and we are really hard working. If we have any concerns, we just raise them.”

The provider had policies and procedures in place to promote the values of the service and to provide staff with clear guidance for best practice. The provider held regular meetings for staff and for people and their relatives. They also undertook surveys to hear people’s feedback about the service.

A new manager, who had previously worked at the service was in post and supported by senior management. Staff felt well supported. They told us the manager was approachable and listened to them. One staff member told us, “Yes [I feel supported] because when the senior staff come in, they always check on you to ask how are? things going and they will speak to you in private if you want to.”

The registered manager had been on long term leave and had resigned the week of the assessment. The service was in the process of registering a new manager with CQC. The Head of Disabilities manager had a presence on site to help with the transition and maintain oversight to help ensure the home was well managed. There was a clear management and staffing structure and staff were aware of their roles and responsibilities. The service was part of a larger organisation which provided further structure and support. For example, external managers visited the service to undertake audits and monitoring to help improve service delivery.

Staff told us they were able to raise concerns with their managers. They also told us they were aware of whistleblowing and how to raise a safeguarding alert with external organisations. Managers and staff confirmed there were regular team meetings and staff one to one supervisions where staff could also raise any concerns about the service.

The provider had policies and procedure s that included guidance for speaking up, such as whistleblowing.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Staff spoke positively of the new manager and the support they received through team meetings and supervision. The manager also had an open-door policy so staff could approach them at any time they needed to.

Managers were clear about their roles and kept themselves up to date with relevant guidance and legislation. Staff understood their role and responsibilities. The provider had systems for assessing, monitoring and mitigating risk and improving the quality of the service. An area manager visits the service at least one month and submits a report of their findings. The Quality Assurance Team was also visiting the service more regularly.

The service worked in partnership with health and social care professionals to support people using the service.

Records indicated the provider worked with other professionals to maintain people’s wellbeing. These included the GP, dietician and district nurse. Where appropriate they made timely referrals and shared information with other relevant agencies for the benefit of people who used the service. For example, the service and the district nurse worked together with one person to reduce their insulin intake.

Feedback from health and social care providers confirmed the provider had a good working relationship with other professionals. A visiting social care professional told us if they had a question about someone using the service, staff responded appropriately and knew people well.

The provider had worked with a range of external organisations to provide appropriate care for people using the service.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.