CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Gledwood Care Homes
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found that risks were assessed and managed, medicines were given safely, and there were enough suitable staff. Infection control, equipment checks and safeguarding arrangements were also found to be effective.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and reviewed, and staff had training and support. The home worked with healthcare professionals and supported people's mental and physical health, food choices and wellbeing.
- Caring?
- Good
- People had good relationships with staff and felt safe. Inspectors observed kind and polite interactions, and found that privacy, dignity, independence and people's choices were respected.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's individual needs and preferences. People were supported with personal goals, relationships, interests, community activities and communication.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive and open culture, good communication and clear management arrangements. The home used audits, checks and people's feedback to monitor and improve care.
What inspectors found, November 2023
Gledwood Care Homes is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with effective management.
The CQC carried out an unannounced inspection on 30 October 2023. One inspector met all 3 people living at the home, spoke with managers and a support worker, and checked care records and other service records.
Inspectors found that people were happy, felt safe and received care that met their needs. Risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely, staff had suitable training, and people were supported with their mental and physical health.
People were involved in decisions about their care and daily lives. Staff treated people with kindness, respected their privacy and supported their independence. The home also had systems to monitor quality and learn from feedback and incidents.
The overall rating was Good. Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led were all rated Good. The previous overall rating was also Good, published on 23 January 2018.
People felt safe and cared for
People were described as happy and well cared for. Inspectors found that their needs were met and that they felt safe.
“People were happy and well cared for. They felt safe and their needs were met.” from the report
Risks were managed
The home assessed risks and put actions in place to reduce possible harm. Environmental and equipment safety checks were also carried out.
“Risk assessments were comprehensive and included action to help protect people from harm.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People had good relationships with staff. Their privacy, dignity, independence and personal choices were respected.
“We observed interactions between staff and people. These were kind, supportive and polite.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected individual needs and preferences. People were supported to pursue interests, maintain relationships and work towards personal goals.
“People were supported as individuals, in line with their needs and preferences.” from the report
Quality was monitored
The provider used audits, checks and feedback to monitor the service and improve care. Staff also discussed incidents and accidents to learn from them.
“There were effective systems for monitoring and improving the quality of the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you assess and support my relative's particular mental and physical healthcare needs?
- 02How do you make sure care plans stay up to date and reflect changes in a person's needs and preferences?
- 03What staffing arrangements would be used if regular family staff were absent and agency staff were needed?
- 04What activities and community support would be available to help my relative follow their interests and maintain relationships?
- 05How would my relative or family raise a concern, and how would you respond if there were a complaint?
This was an unannounced inspection covering the home and care provided, with all five CQC question areas rated Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 November 2023 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, January 2018
Gledwood Care Homes was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with only a minor garden improvement noted.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 3 January 2018. One inspector and an expert by experience observed care, checked records, and spoke with all five people living at the home, a relative, staff and professionals.
The home provided accommodation and personal care for five adults with mental health needs. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines systems, personalised risk assessments, clean premises and appropriate recruitment checks.
People were supported to make choices, take part in activities and maintain their independence. Staff were trained and supervised, treated people with dignity, and worked with health and social care professionals.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as at the previous inspection.
Safe medicines
Inspectors found complete medicines records, correct stock levels and no errors in the three months checked.
“This provided reassurance that people were receiving their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's needs, preferences, abilities and what mattered to them. Staff were able to explain people's individual wishes.
“Care plans included people's assessed needs, interventions and objectives.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff supported privacy, dignity and independence. People were encouraged to make choices and maintain their own rooms.
“We observed throughout our visit that people were treated with kindness and reassurance, and staff took time to talk to people.” from the report
Strong oversight
The management team used regular audits, staff meetings and feedback to identify and address improvements.
“We viewed a range of audits which indicated they were thorough and regular.” from the report
Plain garden
minorThe garden was described as fairly large but plain, without plants or shrubs. The management team said they would improve it and make it more welcoming.
“The garden was fairly large but plain and did not have any plants or shrubs.” from the report
- 01What improvements have been made to the garden since the inspection?
- 02How will you tailor support to my relative's mental health needs, risks, preferences and goals?
- 03How will you support my relative to make choices, stay independent and take part in activities?
- 04How do you check medicines records and respond if an error or missed dose occurs?
- 05How will you discuss and record my relative's end of life wishes if and when they want to do this?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 January 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 Gledwood Care Homes
3 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 February 2011.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Hillingdon
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 £980 to £1,320 a week. 81 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I can truly say that Peter always put Dad at the centre of everything and I know that they found a great friendship in difficult times.”
“She has an unusual combination of kindness and firmness, is quite unflappable, physically strong, extremely savvy”
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.