CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Glebe House Retirement Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, August 2020
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control measures but were not assured about support for people at disproportionate risk from COVID-19.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 11 August 2020. It looked only at infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors were assured about visitor arrangements, social distancing, shielding, admissions, protective equipment, testing, hygiene and managing outbreaks. Visitors did not enter the building, and visits took place in a garden marquee.
Inspectors were not assured that the home had considered and reduced the impact of COVID-19 on people or staff who might be disproportionately at risk. The provider was signposted to resources to improve this.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for the other care areas.
Safer visits
Visitors did not enter the building. Planned visits took place in a garden marquee, helping people keep contact with family and friends.
“Visitors did not access the service building. Pre-planned visits took place in a marque in the garden.” from the report
Protective equipment
Inspectors were assured that protective equipment was being used effectively and safely.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Testing and outbreak planning
Inspectors were assured that the home was accessing testing and had arrangements to prevent or manage infection outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
People at greater risk
needs fixingInspectors were not assured that the home had considered and reduced the impact of COVID-19 on people or staff who might be disproportionately at risk. The provider was signposted to resources to develop its approach.
“We were not assured that action had been taken to consider and reduce any impact to people or staff who may be disproportionately at risk of COVID-19.” from the report
- 01What action has the home taken since the inspection to consider and reduce the impact of COVID-19 on people and staff who may be disproportionately at risk?
- 02How does the home identify people who are clinically extremely vulnerable, and how are their individual needs recorded?
- 03How are visits arranged now, and how can residents keep in contact with family and friends?
- 04How often are people using the home and staff tested, and what happens if someone tests positive?
- 05How does the home prevent and manage infection outbreaks?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not provide ratings for the other care areas. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 August 2020 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, June 2018
Glebe House Retirement Home was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, with some physical risks and systems still being improved.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 15 May 2018. One inspector spoke with people, a relative, staff and managers. They observed care and checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training and quality checks.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines management, suitable care planning and respectful care.
The report also records some issues being addressed. One window opening onto a roof did not have a restrictor. Exposed pipes and parts of dining tables needed checking. The home did not yet use a formal dependency tool to calculate staffing needs, and activities were being organised by care staff rather than a dedicated activities worker.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff building positive relationships and supporting people with compassion. Privacy and independence were respected.
“All interactions were done with compassion and kindness.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines records were completed properly, staff had competency checks, and medicines were stored, ordered and disposed of safely.
“Medicines were managed safely.” from the report
Individual support
Care plans gave staff clear information about people's conditions, preferences, routines and dietary needs. Staff adapted support to people's choices.
“People's care records detailed how their specific care needs were assessed, planned for and met.” from the report
Unresolved physical risks
needs fixingA window opening onto part of the roof did not have a restrictor when inspectors visited. Exposed pipes and a part of each dining table also needed further checking.
“However, there was one window which opened onto part of the roof which did not have a restrictor.” from the report
No formal dependency staffing tool
needs fixingThe home reviewed staffing levels and said it adjusted them when needs changed. However, it did not yet use a formal system to calculate staffing requirements based on people's dependency needs.
“The registered manager told us that they did not currently use a system to calculate the required numbers of staff to meet people's dependency needs.” from the report
Activities coordination
minorThere was no dedicated activities worker. Care staff organised activities, with plans to consider employing someone to coordinate them as occupancy increased.
“There was no activities staff working in the service.” from the report
End of life records
minorSome end of life decisions were recorded, but the manager planned to add more information when people agreed to discuss their wishes.
“The registered manager told us that they were going to include more information in the care records when people agreed to discuss their end of life decisions.” from the report
- 01Has the window restrictor been fitted, and what action was taken about the exposed pipes and dining table edges?
- 02How do you decide how many staff are needed when residents' needs or occupancy increase?
- 03Who plans and delivers activities, and how do you make sure people who stay in their rooms are included?
- 04How are each person's end of life wishes recorded and kept up to date?
- 05What improvements have been completed since the provider took over in May 2017?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating, and it was the first inspection under the current provider. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 June 2018 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Glebe House Retirement Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- August 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- June 2018GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 May 2017.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
23 live-in carers within about an hour of Suffolk
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 17 can care for a couple. 7 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.