CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Little Glen
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe and trusted staff. Inspectors found suitable safeguarding, financial, staffing, premises and medicines arrangements.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before they moved in. Staff were trained and supported, and people received help with eating healthily, medicines and health appointments.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity, respect and equality. Staff listened to people's choices and supported them to be independent.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Support plans were personalised and available in pictorial or easy-read formats. People were supported with their goals, activities, relationships and changing needs.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open culture, regular meetings, effective checks and a management team that knew people well. The home used incidents, feedback and links with other organisations to improve.
What inspectors found, May 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with end-of-life planning still being developed.
This was a comprehensive, announced inspection on 9 April 2018. One inspector spoke with two people, three staff members, the acting manager, a relative and health professionals. They also reviewed care plans, medicine records, audits, checks and staff records.
The home supported three people with learning disabilities. Inspectors found that people felt safe, had choice and control over daily life, and were treated with kindness and respect. Staff supported people to stay healthy, manage medicines, keep in touch with others and take part in activities they enjoyed.
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.
Choice and independence
People were involved in their care and had substantial control over everyday decisions. They were supported to go out, choose activities and take risks in a planned way.
“People continued to be involved in all aspects of their care and had maximum control of their daily lives.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Staff who gave medicines had been trained and assessed as competent. Medicines were stored correctly and records and temperature checks were in good order.
“People received their medicines safely from trained staff who had been observed as competent to administer medicines.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed relaxed, friendly relationships between people and staff. Staff listened patiently and respected people's choices.
“People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff were patient and listened to them, assuring them when they needed to in a calm quiet manner.” from the report
Support for personal goals
People were supported to try new activities and work towards personal ambitions, including holidays, performances and community activities.
“People's personal goals and aspirations were discussed frequently with people so they had an opportunity to change them and try new things if they so wished.” from the report
End-of-life planning
needs fixingNew end-of-life care plans were still being put in place. The manager had identified that more information was needed about people's wishes and where they wanted to receive care at the end of life.
“At the time of the inspection the acting manager was in the process of implementing new end of life care plans.” from the report
- 01Have the new end-of-life care plans now been completed for each person, and how are their wishes recorded?
- 02How are staffing levels changed when people want evening activities, holidays or trips into the community?
- 03How often are each person's easy-read support plans reviewed when their needs or goals change?
- 04How are medicines checks and staff competency assessments kept up to date?
- 05How are people involved in choosing and interviewing new staff?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 May 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 Little Glen
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- May 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 28 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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.