CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Greenslades Nursing Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. The home had safeguarding systems, enough staff, safe recruitment processes and generally safe medicine systems, although several small improvements were identified.
- Effective?
- Good
- No rating was given for Effective in this inspection. Inspectors did find systems supporting people's choice, mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions.
- Caring?
- Good
- People, relatives and professionals gave positive feedback about the care. Inspectors observed respectful interactions, choices being offered and people's privacy and independence being supported.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- No rating was given for Responsive in this inspection. The report says the home sought feedback through meetings, conversations and surveys.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found effective quality monitoring, positive leadership and a strong team culture. People, relatives and staff had confidence in the management.
What inspectors found, February 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-managed care, but identified some records, medicine storage and maintenance that needed improvement.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 17 January 2023. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They also checked care records, medicines, recruitment files, safety checks and quality monitoring.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Caring and Well-led were also rated Good. Inspectors found people felt safe, staff treated them with dignity, medicines were generally managed safely, and there were enough staff to meet people's needs.
The inspection also found some areas to improve. Risk records did not always give enough detail, one medicine was stored incorrectly after opening, cleaning records for some equipment were incomplete, and parts of the building needed decoration and restoration.
The overall Good rating remained the same as at the previous inspection, published on 30 November 2018. Effective and Responsive were not given ratings in this inspection.
People felt safe
People said they felt safe with staff. Safeguarding processes were in place and staff understood how to report concerns.
“People said they felt safe with staff. Our observations showed people were at ease and evidently comfortable with the staff that supported them.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about the care. Staff knew people well and supported their dignity, choices and independence.
“People received care from staff who had developed positive and caring relationships with them. Staff we spoke with knew people well.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found sufficient staff were deployed to meet people's needs. Recruitment checks had also been completed.
“The provider and registered manager ensured there were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet the needs of the people at the service.” from the report
Positive management
The home had quality monitoring systems at both home and provider level. Feedback about the management was positive.
“There was an extensive range of effective quality monitoring and governance systems embedded in the service.” from the report
Risk records needed more detail
needs fixingSome care records did not give enough detail about catheter care and swallowing or choking risks. Inspectors found no evidence that this had harmed anyone.
“Within some people's care records, we identified risk management could be further detailed to aid staff in care and treatment provision, particularly in relation to catheter care and swallowing/choking risks.” from the report
One medicine stored incorrectly
needs fixingOne medicine was stored inappropriately after it had been opened. The report says there was no harm or known impact.
“We identified that one medicine was being stored inappropriately after opening and we raised this with the registered manager.” from the report
Some equipment checks needed better records
minorCleaning schedules for equipment linked to oxygen and nebulisers were not always recorded fully.
“We identified that some improvements were required in relation to the recording of cleaning schedules relating to equipment associated with the use of oxygen and nebuliser equipment.” from the report
Parts of the building looked tired
minorSome areas needed decoration and restoration. Management said this had been identified and was scheduled after a new call bell system was installed.
“We identified that some areas of the service appeared tired and in need of decoration and restoration.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to risk records for catheter care and swallowing or choking since the inspection?
- 02How do you make sure medicines are stored correctly after opening, and what happened after the issue found by inspectors?
- 03How are cleaning schedules for oxygen and nebuliser equipment now recorded and checked?
- 04When will the areas needing decoration and restoration be completed?
- 05What was the timetable for installing the new call bell system mentioned in the report?
This inspection rated Safe, Caring and Well-led; Effective and Responsive were not rated, so those areas were not fully assessed in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 February 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, November 2018
Greenslades Nursing Home is rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care, with Outstanding support for people's individual lives and activities.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 15 and 16 October 2018. Inspectors observed care, spoke with people, relatives and staff, and checked care records, medicines, audits and other documents.
The home was meeting all legal requirements. Inspectors found enough trained staff, safe medicines practice, clean surroundings and good support for people's health, choices and nutrition.
Care was kind and respectful. The home provided many individual activities, trips and community links. Inspectors rated Responsive Outstanding because staff knew people very well and supported their interests, relationships, independence and end of life wishes.
The overall rating stayed Good, as it was at the 2016 inspection. Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led remained Good, while Responsive improved to Outstanding.
Personalised activities
People had a wide range of activities, outings and community links. Staff adapted these to individual interests and encouraged people to take part without pressuring them.
“People were provided with excellent opportunities for activities, engagement and trips out.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and responded patiently to their communication, comfort and emotional needs. Inspectors saw people being treated with dignity.
“All staff were seen to be extremely caring with people.” from the report
End of life support
The home involved families and health professionals in end of life planning. Inspectors found examples of people having a better quality of life in their final days.
“There was excellent end of life care.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
There were enough skilled staff, with flexible staffing when people's needs changed. Medicines were administered, recorded and stored safely.
“There were enough skilled and experienced staff to ensure the safety of people who lived at the home.” from the report
Good staff training
New staff had a lengthy induction, mentors and supervision. Existing staff had ongoing training and opportunities to gain qualifications.
“New staff underwent a comprehensive corporate induction programme for three months.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you support my relative's particular dementia, nursing or mental health needs?
- 02Which activities and trips would suit my relative's interests, and how would you support them if they preferred to stay in their room?
- 03How would you involve our family in care planning and end of life decisions?
- 04How would you respond if my relative's health, mobility, pain or behaviour changed?
- 05How do you make sure medicines, nutrition and referrals to health professionals are managed for each person?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, covering all five key questions; the previous overall rating was Good in 2016 and Responsive improved to Outstanding. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 November 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. The report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
Every inspection of Greenslades Nursing Home
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- November 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodCaring: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 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
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Devon
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 £1,270 a week. 15 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“She is such a warm and gentle person while being professional and competent at the same time.”
“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.”
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.