Glyn House

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

This is the first assessment for this service, we assessed all quality statements. At this assessment the rating for this key question is good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery. People were supported to attend appointments with health professionals as and when required. However, where health professionals set recommendations for staff to follow, the implementation of these recommendations was not recorded. Relatives told us people received person centred care. We observed staff supporting people individually and respecting people’s choices. Staff used a variety of methods to communicate with people and where people became distressed staff provided reassurance and support. Visiting professionals told us the provider made appropriate referrals as and when required.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People received person centred care. One relative told us, “The care is tailored around [my family member] and their needs. The staff focus on what [my family member] can do and help them to develop. I can’t believe how much [my family member’s] communication has improved.

Staff told us care was person centred and focused upon each person as an individual. One staff member said, “We promote person centred care. Every person is different, and people respond differently with different staff. People have their own routines; staff find their own way of working with people.”

We observed people being supported individually by staff. One person went to college, another person went to enjoy a family visit, one person went shopping and another person stayed in to listen to music. Each person was supported appropriately by the staff team.

People were supported to engage in a wide range of activities. These ranged from activities such as horse riding, bike riding and trips out to various places, such as the beach or parks. People were supported to continue with various hobbies and interests.

Staff told us about how they supported people to access the community and integrate into society. One staff member told us about how they supported one person to complete food shopping, another staff member told us about how they supported a person recently on their holiday.

Visiting professionals told us the provider supported people to access the community. One visiting professional told us, “The provider offers access to internal and external meaningful activities.”

Care plans recorded how people accessed community events and detailed activities and hobbies enjoyed by people. Risk assessments were in place to record how people were to be supported safely whilst accessing various activities.

People could access ‘easy read materials’ to gather information, such as how to complain or access health services. Easy read information regarding safeguarding was available and accessible. Easy read is a method of presenting written information to make it easier to understand for people who struggle to read. Relatives told us they were given information, such as how to raise a concern with the provider.

Staff told us how they helped people to understand their rights, such as how to complain if they were not happy. One staff member said, “We can help people understand the complaints procedure, there are different formats of the procedure in the office such as easy read. We go through it with people.”

Care plans and mental capacity assessments were produced in easy read format to make it easier for people to understand.

Staff used a range of methods to communicate with people. Some people used Makaton and / or picture exchange communication system (PECs). Makaton is a communication tool that uses speech, signs, and symbols to help people with communication or learning difficulties communicate. Relatives told us staff communicated effectively with people. Relatives told us they received family and friends’ satisfaction questionnaires, where they could share their opinions of the service.

Staff told us they adapted their communication with different people. One staff member said, “One person sometimes writes things down, other people use PECs and Makaton. It's important we adapt our communication to meet the preferences of the person, not the other way around.”

The provider utilised an advocate who regularly visited people in the home. An advocate is an independent professional who helps people express their needs and make decisions about their care, health, and wellbeing. The previous year’s results from the friends and family questionnaire had been analysed, and from the results there were 6 actions for the provider to implement by the start of this year. However, none of these actions had been completed. The registered manager explained they had not started employment during the time of the questionnaires and the actions had not been handed over. They were planning to review this year’s questionnaire and would ensure actions were completed.

People could access health services. One relative told us, “The staff support [my family member] to attend all their health appointments, such as doctors.” Another relative told us, “They [staff] liaise with external agencies really well, for example [my family member] now goes to see the chiropodist once a month. Historically, this was a real issue. Now [my family member] is in a really good place.”

Staff told us they supported people to access health and social care services. One staff member said, “We support people to attend their appointments. [Person’s name] have a dentist appointment today. We monitor people, to make sure they are healthy and if we have concerns then we help them to attend the doctors or other services as and when required.”

One visiting professional told us they had observed “joined up working” with other professionals. They said, “I am always involved where necessary, with amendments or updates. I am regularly updated and often invited to attend review meetings with other professionals present.” However, another visiting professional told us the provider needed to consider further professional advice and insight when exploring least restrictive options and decision making with people.

Care records confirmed people attended regular appointments with health professionals.

People had access to a variety of social activities and developmental experiences. One person regularly attended college and was now able to access this independently. Other people took part in various community activities and followed interests within the home. Relatives told us about people’s hobbies and events they enjoyed whilst being supported by staff. Another relative told us about an improvement in their family members wellbeing and independence skills. They told us the person was empowered to make their own choices and decisions about what they wanted to do, such as spending a few days at a time in the family home. They stressed this was a big achievement. However, one relative told us the provider often cancelled family home visits when staff were expected to transport the person to visit them. The registered manager told us visits were always rearranged with the relative and they were working with the relative to set up regular monthly visits.

Staff told us they supported people to follow their interests and hobbies. Staff told us about people’s achievements, for example one staff member told us about one person who now chose to spend days and nights with their family in their family home and then chose to return back to the care home, they told us “It’s their choice, when [person’s name] chooses to go and visit family, we respect their decision.”

Records detailed people were supported to maintain contact with family members and to engage in hobbies and interests. People were supported to achieve goals and experience new activities. However, progression towards these goals was not always recorded clearly. The registered manager reviewed the systems for recording progress towards goals.

People’s plans and goals were recorded in care plans. Most relatives told us people were supported to achieve their goals. One relative told us the change in their family members development and progression had been transformative, they said, "[Person's name] has come on so much. I can't believe the transformation. I can't fault the provider or the staff team." However, 1 relative told us the provider had not planned their family members holiday well. They explained due to the person's tendencies, they needed events such as holidays preplanned in advance and counted down, they told us the provider had not carried this out in accordance with the person's needs. They also raised concerns over family home visits, explaining these were not well planned in advance. The provider was aware of these concerns and was working with the relative to try resolve these issues.

Staff told us about people’s plans and goals. They knew people well and could refer to people’s goals without referring to documentation. Staff told us about people's achievements and how different people had developed new skills.

The provider shared their plans for the service, these included developing staff champions in oral hygiene, dignity and healthy eating. The development of a monthly carers group and arranging further holidays for people living in the home. The provider reflected on lessons learnt from 1 person’s holiday explaining this could have been planned in more detail which would have reduced some anxieties. They explained how they intended to support the person on the next holiday. People’s goals and plans for the future were identified, although progress towards these goals were not always clearly recorded, the provider introduced new systems to improve recording of progression towards goals.