CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Glenmoor House Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe care and good management, but the home did not have a registered manager in post.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 20 April 2023. It followed concerns about management oversight and whether incidents were being properly reported. Inspectors looked only at Safe and Well-led.
Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks were assessed, medicines were administered safely, recruitment checks were completed, and staffing was adequate on the inspection day. Infection control arrangements were also suitable.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Good for Well-led. The other areas were not inspected during this visit, so their previous ratings were carried forward. The overall rating stayed Good, as it was at the previous inspection.
Risk management
Care risks such as mobility, medicines, pressure care, and eating and drinking were assessed. Staff understood how to manage these risks.
“Risk assessments were in place to ensure staff worked safely with people and understood what risks may be present in their lives.” from the report
Medicines
Inspectors found that medicines were administered safely by trained staff, with accurate electronic records and clear instructions for medicines given when needed.
“Electronic medicine administration records (MAR) were filled in accurately.” from the report
Management oversight
The home had audits and systems for reviewing accidents, medicines, care plans and staff support. Issues found were acted on promptly.
“Audits of the service were detailed, and any issues found were addressed promptly.” from the report
Approachable staff and managers
People, relatives and staff described an open culture. People said they were involved in their care and could raise concerns.
“People told us they were happy with their care and were consulted about all aspects of their care.” from the report
No registered manager in post
minorThere was a new manager, but they had not yet registered with the CQC. Their application was still being assessed, although the report says they had support from a regional manager and deputy manager.
“At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post.” from the report
Mixed views about staffing
minorFeedback about staffing levels was mixed. Inspectors found adequate staffing on the inspection day and said people were responded to promptly, but this is an issue to ask about.
“We received mixed feedback on staffing levels within the service, however most people told us there were enough staff to provide safe care.” from the report
- 01Has the new manager's CQC registration application been approved, and who is responsible for the home while it is being assessed?
- 02How many staff are normally on duty for each shift, and how do you respond when staffing levels change?
- 03How are accidents and incidents reported, reviewed and shared with families when appropriate?
- 04How will you maintain the medicines safety and record-keeping described in this inspection?
- 05What were the ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive at the previous full inspection?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 May 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, April 2022
Glenmoor House Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring support and improved management, but some families wanted quicker replies.
This was an unannounced inspection on 07 March 2022. The inspection team spoke with people living at the home, 17 family members and five staff. They reviewed care records, medicines records, recruitment files, training information and quality checks.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, suitable medicines systems and good infection control. People's risks were assessed, and staff involved health professionals when needed.
People and most families spoke positively about the care and staff. The home had improved since the previous inspection, when it was rated Requires Improvement. A staffing recommendation had been acted on by introducing a tool to match staffing levels to people's needs.
This inspection looked only at Safe and Well-led. The report says the ratings for the other key questions were carried forward from an earlier inspection.
Staffing matched to needs
Inspectors found enough staff and saw that people's needs were used to decide staffing levels on each unit. Staff recruitment records also showed the required safety checks.
“There were sufficient staff to meet people's needs. People's needs were kept under review and were used to influence staffing levels within the home.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were stored, given and recorded safely. Staff had medicines training and their competence was checked.
“Medicines were received, stored, administered and disposed of safely.” from the report
Good infection control
The home followed infection control measures and government guidance on COVID-19. Inspectors were assured about PPE, testing, visiting and outbreak management.
“Staff worked consistently within the providers policy and procedure for infection prevention and control and followed government guidance related to COVID-19.” from the report
Improved management systems
Care records were complete and consistent. Regular audits and provider monitoring were used to identify and track improvements.
“Systems and processes implemented by the registered manager following the previous inspection had brought about improvement.” from the report
Some staff were busy
minorAlthough inspectors found staffing levels sufficient overall, a few people said staff were very busy. Ask how the home manages this during busy periods.
“A few people referred to staff being very busy.” from the report
Replies were not always timely
needs fixingSome people said the management team did not always respond quickly to questions about their relative's care and wellbeing.
“However, a few people said communication could be improved as the management team were not always timely in responding to queries about their relative's care and wellbeing.” from the report
- 01How do you use the dependency tool to decide staffing levels on each unit, and what happens when staff are very busy?
- 02How quickly should families expect a response to questions about a relative's care and wellbeing?
- 03What checks are made to ensure medicines are given and recorded correctly for my relative?
- 04How will you keep families informed during an infection outbreak or changes to visiting arrangements?
- 05Which ratings for Effective, Caring and Responsive were carried forward from the earlier inspection?
This was an unannounced focused inspection of Safe and Well-led; the other key question ratings were carried forward from an earlier inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 April 2022 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 Glenmoor House Care Home
6 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- May 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2022Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2021Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2017Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 March 2016.
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
89 live-in carers within about an hour of North Northamptonshire
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 £1,260 a week. 76 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
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.