Lavender Lodge

Updated 1 November 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2012, to look at the overall quality of the service and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection was carried out on 28 September 2018 by one inspector and was unannounced. We also made telephone calls on the 4 October to relatives to gain their feedback. Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that requires them to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed information we held about the service including statutory notifications. Statutory notifications include information about important events, which the provider is required to send us by law.

During the inspection we spoke with four people who lived at the home, two staff members, the chief of staff and the manager. We looked at Care plans relating to two people, three staff files and a range of other relevant documents relating to how the service operated. These included monitoring data, training records and complaints and compliments.

Updated 1 November 2018

The inspection took place on 28 September 2018 and was unannounced. At our last inspection on 18 October 2017, the service was found not to be meeting the required standards in the areas we looked at. There were breaches against regulations of the Health and Social Care Act (Regulated Activities) 2014.

The breaches included regulation 9, care and treatment of service users did not always meet their needs or reflect their preferences.

Regulation 11, The provider had not ensured that people’s changing needs were reviewed and updated in their care plans.

Regulation 12, The provider had not ensured the proper and safe management of medicines and had not ensured infection control procedures were managed effectively.

Regulation 17, The provider did not have effective systems to monitor and improve the service. There was a lack of documentation by staff and care records required updating to ensure people's needs were met.

Following the last inspection, we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions in safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led to at least good. At this inspection we found that the provider had made the improvements required.

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. At the time of the inspection there was no registered manager for this location.

Lavender Lodge provides care for up to nine adults with a learning difficulty. At the time of our inspection nine people were living there. Lavender Lodge is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

The service was safe. There were safe medicine practices in place with regular monitoring to keep people safe. Infection control practices had improved and now met the required standards. Staff received infection control training and checks were in place to ensure best practice. Safe and effective recruitment practices were followed to help ensure that all staff were suitably qualified and experienced. Staff had received training in how to safeguard people from harm and knew how to report concerns, both internally and externally. Plans and guidance had been drawn up to help staff deal with unforeseen events and emergencies. The environment and equipment used were regularly checked and well maintained to keep people safe.

The service was effective. People were given choice and control over their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. Staff received the right training and skills to meet people’s needs effectively. People were supported with a varied and healthy food options, Staff supported people with making healthy choices. People were supported to access health care services. People were involved with the design and decoration of their home environment.

The service was caring. Staff knew people well and staff cared for them in a compassionate way. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and supported people to maintain relationships. Staff delivered care that was supportive, kind and caring. People were involved in deciding how their care was provided and staff promoted their choice.

The service was responsive. People were supported to have their say with regular house meetings and one to one time with their keyworker. People`s needs were assessed to ensure people received the support they required. People were supported with their interests and set weekly goals they wanted to achieve. People and their relatives confirmed they were involved with reviewing their support plan. A new complaints forms had been introduced and discussed with people to ensure people understood how to raise any concerns should they need to.

The service was well-led. The manager promoted an open culture. There were effective systems to monitor the quality of the service, identified issues were actioned and lessons learned. Staff had the right training, skills and values. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities and worked well as a team. The manager was clear about their vision and values for the service and what they wanted to achieve. Staff received competency checks, supervisions and regular meetings. People, staff and relatives we spoke with were all positive about the changes since the last inspection and had confidence in how the home was being run.