CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Glenhurst Manor
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, April 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control measures were in place.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 29 March 2021. It focused on how the home prevented and controlled COVID-19 infections.
Inspectors found visitor testing, temperature checks, health questions, hand-washing facilities and personal protective equipment. They were assured that visitors, people living in the home and staff were being protected from infection.
The home had outbreak plans, safe procedures for new admissions, regular cleaning and staff training. It was also taking part in COVID-19 testing and vaccination.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for most of the five questions.
Visitor safety
Visitors were welcomed through a dedicated testing suite and were checked before entering. The home also provided hand-washing facilities and PPE.
“There was a clear process in place to welcome visitors to the home, this included rapid result COVID-19 testing, temperature checks and health questions.” from the report
Outbreak planning
The home had a plan for managing outbreaks and a structured process for admitting new people, including testing and isolation.
“The home had a contingency plan in place for managing outbreaks.” from the report
Staff infection control
Staff had infection prevention and control training, including training on using PPE. Hand-washing audits were also carried out.
“Staff had received infection prevention and control training including how to put on and take off PPE correctly.” from the report
Cleaning and testing
Inspectors found regular cleaning of frequently touched areas. The home was taking part in testing and vaccination programmes.
“Infection prevention was enhanced by regular cleaning of the home including those areas frequently touched such as door handles and light switches.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have your visitor testing, health checks and visiting arrangements changed since the inspection?
- 02How do you now test and isolate new admissions?
- 03How often are frequently touched areas cleaned, and how is this checked?
- 04How do you make sure staff remain trained and competent in putting on and removing PPE?
- 05What is your current plan for managing an infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures only; the service was inspected but not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 April 2021 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, April 2018
Glenhurst Manor was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with activities reduced while an activities coordinator vacancy was being filled.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection over two days. Inspectors brought it forward because of concerns about management and care, but they did not substantiate those concerns. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely, staff were trained, and people's health, nutrition and hydration needs were supported.
People were treated with kindness and dignity. Care plans were current and personalised, complaints were handled, and people could make choices about their daily routines. Activities were still available, but people said they had reduced while the activities coordinator post was vacant.
The home had recently gained a registered manager after being without one for nearly a year. Inspectors found an open management culture and systems to monitor quality. The previous inspection, published in January 2016, had also rated the home Good with no regulatory breaches.
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored and administered safely. Records were complete and checks were carried out.
“Medicines were well-managed and people received their medicines as prescribed by their doctor.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff were described as kind and compassionate. Inspectors saw people being supported discreetly and with dignity.
“Staff treated people with kindness and compassion in their day-to-day care and also respected people's dignity.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's needs, preferences and routines. Inspectors found that care was delivered in line with those plans.
“The plans were also person centred with everyone treated as an individual person.” from the report
Staff training
Staff received core training, additional training where needed, regular supervision and annual appraisals.
“Records showed that staff received core training in subjects including moving and handling, first aid, Mental Capacity Act, infection control and safeguarding.” from the report
Open management
Staff and relatives said concerns were listened to and dealt with. Quality checks and surveys were being used to look for improvements.
“There was an open and responsive management culture.” from the report
Reduced activities
needs fixingPeople said activities had diminished after the activities coordinator left. The vacancy was being covered by existing staff and the home was recruiting for the role.
“People all told us that they looked forward to the post being filled as activities were much enjoyed and people felt the activities had diminished since the coordinator left the home.” from the report
Recruitment records
minorSome staff files did not include complete employment histories or a health declaration. The manager checked and updated the files after the inspection.
“However, there were some gaps within some staff member's employment history and no health declaration had been obtained.” from the report
- 01Has the activities coordinator vacancy now been filled, and what activities are currently available each week?
- 02How do you check that staff recruitment files contain complete employment histories and health declarations?
- 03How long has the current registered manager been in post, and what changes have been made since the inspection?
- 04How are people's preferred routines, interests and care needs reviewed with them and their relatives?
- 05How do you monitor whether complaints, accidents and quality checks lead to improvements?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering the premises and care provided, with all five CQC ratings assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 April 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 Glenhurst Manor
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- April 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 January 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
37 live-in carers within about an hour of Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole
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 £1,000 to £1,340 a week. 26 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“We could not have managed without her calm, reassuring presence and practical knowledge and skill in caring and supporting both my husband and the family and I.”
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
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.