Revitalise Jubilee Lodge

Revitalise Jubilee Lodge provides accommodation, personal care and nursing care for up to 36 people with learning disabilities, physical disabilities, sensory impairment, or dementia. The service offers short breaks and respite care in the form of holidays. People were able to bring along companions if they wished. At the time of our inspection there were 31 people receiving a service. People who used the service were supported by a team of staff and volunteers.

We expect health and social care providers to guarantee people with a learning disability and autistic people respect, equality, dignity, choices and independence and good access to local communities that most people take for granted. ‘Right support, right care, right culture’ is the guidance CQC follows to make assessments and judgements about services supporting people with a learning disability and autistic people and providers must have regard to it.

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

Right Support:

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People's risks in relation to their care were well managed. Risks to the environment required improvements. However, the provider did respond proactively to our concerns. There were sufficient staff and volunteers deployed to meet people's needs and choices.

Medicines were managed safely. People were supported by staff and volunteers to attend activities of their choice.

Right Care:

Staff received training in equality and diversity. Assessments prompted staff to gain information about people’s religious or cultural needs and further discussions were had when people arrived. People received kind and compassionate care. Staff and people cooperated to assess risks people might face. Where appropriate, staff encouraged and enabled people to take positive risks.

Right Culture:

The provider had not always responded in timely manner to all risks relating to the health, safety and welfare of people using services, However, they responded proactively to remedy the concerns found during and following the inspection. A registered manager was not in post, however a new manager had recently begun working at the service.

People told us they enjoyed their holidays at Revitalise Jubilee Lodge, and some had been many times.

Staff told us they received training relevant to their role and felt supported by the management team. People were relaxed around the staff and volunteers and their independence was promoted and respected. Volunteers told us they were supported by staff throughout the time they were supporting the service.

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 23 October 2017).

Why we inspected

This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

Jubilee Lodge provides accommodation, personal care and nursing care for up to 36 people with learning disabilities, physical disabilities, sensory impairment or dementia. The service offers short breaks and respite care in the form of holidays. People were able to bring along companions if they wished. At the time of our inspection there were 33 people receiving a service, this included three independent carers/companions. The registered provider operates a residential volunteering programme so, in addition to the permanent staff, people were cared for and supported by volunteers.

The service has 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.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

The service was safe. The registered provider’s recruitment procedures ensured that only suitable staff were employed. There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs. Risks to people’s health and wellbeing were appropriately assessed, managed and reviewed. Where required people's medicines were managed and stored safely. Staff were aware of their responsibilities to keep people safe and to protect them from harm and abuse.

The service was effective. People were supported by staff that had the skills and experience needed to provide effective care. The registered manager understood their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. People were supported to eat and drink enough and maintain a balanced diet and to access health care services when required.

The service was caring. Staff were kind and sensitive to people’s needs. Staff were observed providing good personalised care and it was evident they clearly understood people’s individual needs. Staff ensured people’s privacy and dignity was respected and maintained at all times.

The service was responsive. People were involved in the planning and review of their care and support needs during their stay at the service. People were supported by staff to partake in a range of activities. Excursions and activities were tailored around people’s likes, choices and abilities. There was an effective complaints system in place and people told us that they were confident that any concerns would be listened to and acted upon.

The service was well-led. Staff, people and their companions spoke positively about the registered manager who was committed to providing an excellent person centred service; ensuring people enjoyed a positive and enjoyable holiday break. There were systems in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of the service provided. People using the service and staff had the opportunity to say how they felt about the service and the service it provided. The registered manager was able to demonstrate how they measured and analysed the care and support provided to people, and how this ensured that the service was operating safely and was continually improving to meet people’s needs.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary, please read the full report.

Is the service caring?

We spoke with six people who used the service. One person, who was on the last day of their stay, said to us, "I have come a long way to stay here and I would come back. I've had a great time." Another person, who was a regular visitor to the service, said, "I'm very happy; it's great here." We observed the care and attention people received from staff. All interactions we saw were appropriate, respectful and friendly and there was a pleasant and relaxed atmosphere throughout the service.

Is the service responsive?

The management team responded in an open, thorough and timely manner to complaints. Therefore people could be assured that complaints were investigated and action was taken as necessary. Staff reported some problems they had experienced over the previous few months in providing a good service, but told us they had confidence in the new management team, who they felt were approachable and capable. They would have no difficulty speaking to them if they had any concerns about the service.

Is the service safe?

People were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent it from happening. People were protected by effective staff recruitment systems in relation to paid staff, however we found shortfalls in the recruitment processes for volunteers from overseas. This meant that people were not always wholly protected by safe and effective recruitment practices.

The provider had systems in place that ensured the safe receipt and storage of medicines. However, the provider did not have a sufficiently robust system for the administration of medicines to people when out on excursions. This meant that people were not always protected by safe and effective medication administration systems.

We have asked the provider to tell us what they are going to do to meet the requirements of the law in relation to ensuring safe and effective recruitment practices and providing safe and robust medication administration systems.

Is the service effective?

People we spoke with were satisfied with the care and support they received. No one raised any concerns with us. All of the staff we spoke with were knowledgeable and motivated to provide good care and support to people. Each person's needs were clearly assessed prior to them coming to stay at the service. Care records indicated that care and support was delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

Is the service well led?

There was a new management team in place at the service, all of whom had been in place a matter of weeks. Staff told us that they felt well supported by the new management team, there was a good team ethic and they were able do their jobs safely. The provider had a range of quality monitoring systems in place to ensure that care was being delivered appropriately by staff, that the service was continuously improving and that people were satisfied with the service they were receiving. It was in response to concerns raised through their monitoring processes that the provider took action to make changes to the management team.

We looked at records which showed that people's care and support needs had been assessed and documented before they started their respite break. The assessments were reviewed again upon arrival at the service to ensure they were up to date. One person said, 'We get spoilt here. We are very well looked after.'

The premises were safe, suitable and fit for purpose. Adequate emergency procedures were in place and the safety equipment we saw had been regularly checked and well maintained.

Suitable arrangements had been put in place to ensure staff were appropriately supported to perform their roles. One member of staff told us, 'I feel very well supported. The new manager is very approachable and gives time to listen to us [staff].'

The provider had put systems in place to deal with complaints and concerns raised by people who used the service. Records showed that complaints received had been properly recorded and investigated.

A comprehensive assessment of each person's needs and wishes was carried out before they stayed at the service for the first time. The assessment was then updated before each subsequent stay. The people we spoke with told us that they were involved in their assessments, and that staff asked them about any changes they would like before each visit.

People who use the service were asked for their views about their care and treatment and they were acted on. The provider sent feedback forms to each person following their stay at the home, and these were analysed and actions taken to address any concerns. We saw the most recent report, which showed that actions had been taken to address concerns about the quality of food and a wish for shorter breaks.