Glenholme Holdingham Grange

Medicines were administered as prescribed. Staff had relevant training and their competence was checked regularly.

“People received their medicines safely, as they were prescribed.” from the report

Inspectors saw staff treating people respectfully and supporting their privacy, dignity and independence.

“People were well supported and their privacy and dignity respected and promoted.” from the report

Care plans included people's life histories, preferences, communication needs and required support. They were reviewed monthly or sooner.

“Care plans and risk assessments were well written, person-centred and reviewed regularly.” from the report

People could join activities in their rooms, in groups and in the community. Relatives were able to visit freely and were included in social events.

“People were able to access a broad range of meaningful activities whether at the service or in the community.” from the report

The home had made improvements since the previous inspection, including better quality checks and records. It was no longer in breach of regulations.

“At this inspection, the provider had made sufficient improvements, and the service was no longer in breach of the regulation.” from the report

Some people said call bells were not always answered quickly at night, particularly when there was an emergency. The existing system could not provide data to analyse response times, although management planned checks and a system update.

“The system used did not allow for the data to be analysed.” from the report

Inspectors were not always assured that hygiene practices in the commercial kitchen were being monitored well enough. Cleaning schedules and some food and date labelling needed better oversight, although these were corrected when raised.

“Cleaning schedules, some food and date labelling in the fridges required better monitoring.” from the report