Glenfield

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question required improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

Since we last inspected the provider had improved the safety of the service. Shortfalls in medicines management had been addressed. The premises had been upgraded and made safer. Following staff training, people’s records were of a better quality .

People were safe at the service and had trusting relationships with staff. Relatives were confident staff kept their family members safe. Staff were trained in safeguarding and followed the provider’s safeguarding policies and procedures to ensure people were protected from abuse and neglect.

Staff used positive behaviour support to reduce risks to people who might become distressed. They followed people’s risk assessments to ensure they received safe and effective support. The premises were clean and tidy, and the provider had upgraded and improved them.

The service was well-staffed. Staff had the training they needed to meet people’s individual support needs. The provider had improved the service’s recruitment policy to ensure the staff employed were suitable to work with people who use care services.

Medicines were well-managed and safely stored and administered. Staff involved people and relatives, where appropriate, in medicines reviews.

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture. At our last assessment we rated this key question as requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

Relatives and staff said the service was running more effectively since our last inspection. They told us communication and teamwork had improved. Record-keeping was better organised and more professional.

Glenfield had an open and honest culture. Leaders knew people using the service personally and visited them regularly. Relatives were satisfied with how the service was run. Outcomes for people were positive, and they received consistent good quality care and support.

Staff said leaders and managers were approachable and listened to them if they had any suggestions or concerns. The provider promoted staff welfare and had systems in place to support staff well-being. The provider used audits to monitor all aspects of the service and managers, and staff followed action plans if improvements were necessary.

Leaders and managers continually improved the service and ensured all staff learnt from incidents and accidents. Staff worked in partnership with other health and social care professionals, so people received holistic care and treatment.