CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Glen Lyn
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe, staffing levels were adequate and risks were assessed. Medicines, infection control, equipment and fire safety were checked and managed.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had suitable training and support, care plans were reviewed and people received help with healthcare, food and drink. The report found that legal requirements around consent were followed.
- Caring?
- Good
- People said staff were kind and respectful. Their privacy, dignity, independence, choices and involvement in care were supported.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised around people's routines, preferences and communication needs. People could join activities, keep in touch with family and use community facilities.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home was managed openly and the manager worked alongside staff. Audits were used to identify shortfalls and make changes.
What inspectors found, February 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with earlier medicines recording errors addressed.
This was an unannounced inspection on 04 February 2020. One inspector spoke with eight people, one visitor and three care staff. They also reviewed care, medicines, staff and management records.
The inspectors found that people felt safe and well cared for. The home was clean and well maintained. Staff were trained, knew people well and supported their health, choices, independence, activities and relationships.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection, published on 16 August 2017.
People felt safe
People said they felt safe with staff. The inspector found adequate staffing and systems to protect people from abuse and avoidable harm.
“I haven't felt safe everywhere I've lived but I do feel safe here. The staff are very nice to you.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions about their care and supported to remain independent.
“Throughout the inspection we heard, and saw, people were spoken with in a friendly and respectful manner.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's routines, likes, dislikes and lifestyle choices. People could choose when to get up, go to bed and where to eat.
“Each care plan had detailed information about people's morning and evening routines.” from the report
Good links with families and the community
Visitors were welcomed and people could take part in activities, local events, religious services and community outings.
“There was a variety of organised activities and entertainment to provide social stimulation and promote people's well-being.” from the report
Active management
The manager worked alongside staff, listened to people's views and used checks to improve the service when needed.
“The registered manager led by example. They worked alongside other staff to monitor standards and identify where improvements could be made.” from the report
Earlier medicines recording errors
needs fixingThe report says audits had found errors in medicine recording. The home had updated its policy and introduced administration by two staff to reduce the risk of further errors.
“For example, following recording errors on medication records the policy for administering medicines had been up dated and reviewed.” from the report
- 01What checks are now used to make sure medicines are recorded correctly every time?
- 02How would you support my relative's specific health needs, including appointments and any specialist advice?
- 03How would my relative's daily routines, choices and independence be recorded and supported?
- 04What activities and community visits would be suitable for my relative?
- 05How would you keep our family involved and respond if we raised a concern?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided; all five ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 28 February 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, August 2017
Glen Lyn was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with no major concerns.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 27 July 2017. The inspector spoke with eight people living at the home, three staff members, the manager and two relatives. They observed care and lunch, and checked care plans, medicines, staff files and quality records.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe, listened to and well cared for. Staff knew people's needs, supported their choices and worked in a calm and unhurried way.
The home had enough staff and used checks to make sure staff were suitable and trained. Care plans were detailed, medicines were monitored and people's health, food and activities were supported. The manager and owners were closely involved in the daily running of the home.
The home was rated Good at the previous inspection in December 2015 and remained Good. The report notes one minor area being reviewed: the annual satisfaction survey had a very low response rate.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs without rushing them. Staffing had been increased after a review of people's needs.
“People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff to meet their needs in a relaxed and unhurried manner.” from the report
Personalised care
People could make choices about daily life and were supported according to their preferences, including where and when they ate.
“People received care and support that was personalised and respected their wishes and preferences.” from the report
Kind relationships
People spoke very positively about staff. The small, stable team knew people well and offered individual attention.
“People were very pleased with the care and support they received from staff.” from the report
Good care planning
Care plans gave staff clear information about people's physical and mental needs, risks and preferred support.
“People's care plans demonstrated that the easy-going, relaxed atmosphere in the home was based on careful, skilled care planning and implementation.” from the report
Close management
The manager and owners were involved in the home every day. They used audits, conversations and reviews to monitor care and make improvements.
“Both owners worked in the home on a daily basis.” from the report
Low survey response
minorVery few people had completed the existing annual satisfaction survey. The manager was reviewing its format and use, but families should ask what changed afterwards.
“The registered manager was currently reviewing the format and use of the annual satisfaction surveys as there had been a very low completion rate using the existing questionnaire format.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to the annual satisfaction survey since the inspection, and how do you now gather views from people and families?
- 02How do you check that current staffing levels still match the needs of people living here?
- 03How are medicines, including any medicines that need to be crushed, checked and reviewed?
- 04How will you support my relative's personal routines, food preferences, activities and choice about where to spend time?
- 05How will you keep me informed if my relative's health or care needs change?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, and the report states that the Good rating from December 2015 remained unchanged. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 August 2017 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 Glen Lyn
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 December 2010.
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
76 live-in carers within about two hours of Somerset
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 £1,370 a week. 62 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
“She was not phased by anything, she was adaptable, kind & gave us complete confidence to go away & not worry about a thing!”
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.