Glyn House

Updated 9 October 2024

Date of assessment 16 October to 12 November 2024. This assessment was carried out in response to concerns raised and due to the service currently being unrated. This is the first assessment for the service. The overall rating for the service is Requires Improvement based on the findings of this inspection. We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements regarding incident management, restrictive practices and overall governance. This was a breach of 2 regulations. Please see the Safe and Well led sections of this full report. Glyn house is a care home providing personal care for up to 5 autistic people and people with a learning disability and physical disabilities. At the time of this assessment 4 people were living in the home. We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.

Updated 9 October 2024

While the people we observed and most relatives expressed that they were generally happy with their care, our assessment found elements of care did not meet the expected standards. The service was not always able to demonstrate how they were meeting the underpinning principles of right support, right care, right culture. People’s choice was at times restricted by the staff team without clear authorisation or best interest decisions. The registered manager responded to our feedback by addressing restrictive practices with the staff team. People were observed interacting positively with the staff who supported them. We observed people being supported to access the community and engage in a range of activities. People were encouraged to develop independence skills and staff respected people’s choice when they declined to carry out tasks. Staff spoke kindly to people and supported people when they appeared anxious or upset. Staff used people’s preferred method of communication, such as sign language. Relatives told us people were safe living in the home. However, 1 relative told us the provider had not shared information or lessons learnt with them following concerns they had raised. At the time of this assessment, the provider was working with this relative to address their concerns. Relatives told us people were supported to attend health visits and most relatives told us people’s health and wellbeing had improved since moving into the home.