Archived: Ivy Lodge

About the service

Ivy Lodge is a residential care home providing personal care to people with learning disabilities and/or autism. The service can support up to seven people. At the time of the inspection seven people were living at the home.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Mental capacity assessments and best interest paperwork was in place for most areas such as personal care, use of equipment and finance. However, the kitchen had a coded lock on it and people could only access it with staff supervision. There was no paperwork on file to evidence that people had consented to this or that this was a best interest decision.

Care plans were personalised and updated in response to people’s changing needs. However, long and short term goals were not clear and achievements were not captured. Staff listened to what people wanted and acted quickly to support them. Staff looked to offer people solutions to aid their independence and develop their skills.

People told us they were happy, felt safe. Relatives said that staff had a good understanding of their loved one’s needs and preferences. Risks had been identified and measures put in place to keep people safe from harm. Medicines were managed safely and administered by trained staff.

Staff were well trained and skilled. They worked with people to overcome challenges and promote their independence. The emphasis of support was towards inclusion and enabling people to learn essential life skills. Equality, Diversity and Human Rights (EDHR) were promoted and understood by staff.

People, professionals and their families described the staff as caring, kind and friendly and the atmosphere of the home as relaxed and engaging.

People received pre-admission assessments and effective person-centred support. The service was responsive to people’s current and changing needs. Regular reviews took place which ensured people were at the centre of their support.

Leadership was visible and promoted good teamwork. People, professionals and staff spoke highly about the management and staff had a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities. The registered manager, seniors, shift leader and staff team worked together in a positive way to support people to achieve their own goals and to be safe.

Checks of safety and quality were made to ensure people were protected. Work to continuously improve the service was noted and the registered manager was keen to make changes that would impact positively on people's lives.

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.

The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 7 April 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Ivy Lodge is a small care home providing the regulated activity accommodation and personal care for up to seven people with a learning disability. On the day of the inspection there were seven people living in the home. All the bedrooms were single occupancy. There was a large open plan lounge and dining area.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Staff understood how to keep people safe. They were supported by training and the provider’s safeguarding policy to ensure they knew what to do when concerns needed to be reported.

Staff told us they were supported through supervision and were provided with sufficient training to carry out their job roles.

Staff were recruited safely. The recruitment process was robust and followed the provider’s recruitment policy. This made sure that suitable staff were employed to care for people. There were enough staff on each shift to meet people’s needs and wishes.

People and their relatives were involved in planning the care and support they needed to lead an active life.

Medicines were stored and administered appropriately. Only staff that had been properly trained were able to give people their medicines.

People were supported to eat and drink enough to meet their needs and to make informed choices. Staff ensured people obtained advice and support from health professionals to maintain and improve their health.

Staff listened to people and understood and respected their needs. Staff reflected people’s wishes and preferences in the way they delivered care. They understood the issues involved in supporting people who did not have capacity to make some decisions.

Staff were kind and caring. People were supported by staff that understood them very well and enabled them to be themselves.

Staff were responsive to people’s needs and there were systems in place to ensure any concerns or complaints were responded to appropriately. People were encouraged and supported to engage in activities they were interested in.

The registered manager was a visible presence in the home and supported and enabled a culture which focused on the needs and wishes of the individual.

There was a range of systems in place to assess and monitor the quality and safety of the service and to ensure people were receiving appropriate support.

We also examined records, spoke with the manager and a support worker, and observed the support people received.

Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes. Where people did not have the capacity to consent, the provider acted in accordance with legal requirements. We saw that staff respected people's choices.

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights. People talked about the various things they did and we observed that people were engaged with individual and group activities during our visit.

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines.

There were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs. We observed that people were relaxed with staff, who supported them in an unhurried manner.

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and manage the quality of the service and risks to people's health, safety and welfare.

People told us they had been involved in assessments of needs and developing their care plans. Care plans we examined were person centred and individualised. Records included information about how people preferred to communicate, such as using signs or photographs.

There were suitable safeguarding procedures and practice in place that ensured people were protected from harm.

People were supported by suitable numbers of experienced and qualified staff. We noted that staffing levels were flexible and influenced by activities people wanted to do. Staff confirmed that they had received training appropriate for their roles and were regularly supervised.

The home had suitable quality monitoring systems in place. People living in the home and their representatives were consulted about the running of the home. Any areas suggested for improvement were acted upon.

People were involved in planning meals and preparing them. There were a range of activities that individuals could participate in, such as shopping, visits to the pub and holidays both in the UK and abroad.

People were able to maintain their independence, risk assessments were in place to ensure they were safe for example when travelling on public transport.