The Glen Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

There was good leadership and management at The Glen Care Home. Staff understood the shared values of the provider and praised the new provider for the improvements they had implemented since they had purchased the home. The provider had an effective governance process, to ensure continuous improvement. Audits undertaken were effective in identifying and addressing areas for improvement. The registered manager and deputy manager were keen to provide the best possible service to people. They promoted a culture of continuous learning and improving the quality and safety of the service and ensured learning was shared across the staff team to help mitigate future risk. People and staff spoke positively about the management team, who promoted a positive, caring culture. The registered manager had an effective system to investigate and learn from incidents and concerns. The team worked collaboratively with people using the service, those close to them, and other professionals.

This service scored 79 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

Staff were enthusiastic and passionate about the registered manager and providers vision and values about the service. They talked positively about the new provider and the changes they had made since they bought the home. Staff told us they felt listened to and able to make suggestions for the development of the service.

There was a robust programme of checks, monitoring and audits which identified areas for improvement. There were clear processes to ensure the home continually sought to improve. The registered manager and staff actively sought the views of people and their families through surveys, individual meetings, and face to face meetings.

Staff told us the registered manager and deputy manager had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. A member of staff told us, “The manager is very fair and approachable. The deputy is supportive and helps us out. I have seen the manager with her gloves on unblocking a toilet. She's always willing to step in and help and get her hands dirty.” The relationships we saw between people, their visitors and staff were warm and friendly. The atmosphere in the service was calm and relaxed. People and relatives spoke very highly about the registered manager and her team saying they had found them very approachable and helpful. Comments included, “I know I can always talk to [registered manager], she’s very friendly, always nice” and “The manager is gorgeous, helpful and caring.”

The registered manager and deputy manager, were visible around the home on each day of the assessment, supporting the staff team and the assessment process. They both had a very good understanding of people’s needs and guided staff to ensure these were met. Throughout the assessment process they demonstrated integrity, openness and honesty.

The home had a positive culture, where staff felt they could speak up and would be listened to. The staff team were positive about working at the home and happy working together to make the day better. We observed staff to be working well together, planning, and supporting each other.

There were processes for raising concerns and providing feedback. The provider had clear information in place for people and for staff on how to raise concerns, including clear complaints and whistle blowing policies.

The registered manager told us there were staff from a range of different cultural backgrounds, genders and races. They told us they worked with staff to be inclusive and work as a team. Staff spoke proudly about working at The Glen Care Home and said they felt like a family.

The registered manager engaged with staff to involve them with the running of the service. They had an open-door policy, regular staff meetings and worked alongside staff so they could speak openly.

There was clear accountability at the home, with staff understanding their roles and responsibilities. The registered manager had a good understanding of their responsibilities and explained how they, with the deputy manager, maintained oversight of people’s care. There was a clear audit structure in place to make sure key areas of risk were regularly reviewed.

There were robust processes for monitoring the quality of people’s care and identifying where improvements needed to be made. Staff were regularly involved in staff meetings and told us they had opportunities to discuss their ideas, opinions and contribute to the governance of the service. The registered manager ensured we were notified of all events they were required to tell us about. Records and personal information were held securely on the providers electronic care system. Staff had designated pass codes to access this information.

Staff worked in partnership with other agencies, to improve the quality of their care.

Staff told us the home worked in partnership with other agencies, such as health and social care professionals.

Health and social care professionals told us the home worked well with them to meet people’s needs.

There were good working relationships with other agencies and staff contacted them whenever required.

Staff said they were able to share ideas in their supervision meetings and staff meetings. They told us there were good opportunities to learn and develop in their roles. One staff member told us, “The training is good, we have all the training we need. I am doing an additional course on safeguarding at the moment, I'm really interested in that.”

The registered manager and deputy manager were able to easily monitor people’s care from the electronic records and identify any areas that needed to be addressed and raised these with staff. There were good processes in place to monitor audits, risk and care planning. Training was up to date and additional training was sourced if appropriate, if requested by staff. Communication was good and staff worked as a team.