Lyndale Residential Home

Updated 12 January 2019

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 is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

We undertook an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 7 November 2018. The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector and an expert by experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. The expert by experience’s area of expertise was in mental health and autism.

Prior to the inspection, we reviewed information we held on our systems about the service. This included notifications the service had sent to us. A notification is information about important events, which the service is required to send us by law.

We also used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return (PIR). This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually, to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. At our last inspection of the service in May 2016 we did not identify any concerns with the care provided to people.

During our inspection we spent time talking with people in the home. We also spent observing daily routines and interactions between people and the staff supporting them. This helped us gain a better understanding of people and the care they received.

We spoke with the registered manager. We also met four members of staff and a student studying social work who was on placement at the home. We looked at records relating to people’s care and the running of the home. These included two peoples’ care and support plans and records relating to medicine administration. We also looked at the quality monitoring checks and audits carried out at the service. We reviewed staff records including records relating to their training.

We met 13 of the 15 people living at Lyndale and spoke with 10 of them. We also spoke with a visitor to the home.

Following the inspection, we contacted nine health and social care professionals and a community nursing team. We asked them about their views and experiences of the service. Four professionals responded to our request. Their feedback can be found throughout the inspection report.

Updated 12 January 2019

This comprehensive inspection of Lyndale Residential Home took place on 7 November 2018. The inspection was unannounced. This meant that the provider and staff did not know we were coming.

Lyndale Residential Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. We regulate both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The service supported people who were living with mental health issues. People living at Lyndale received help with their all aspects of their care, including their well-being and positive mental health.

The home is in Tavistock near the town centre. It has been converted from two three-storey houses which are linked through communal areas. There are bedrooms on all three floors of the home.

At our last inspection we rated the service Good. There was no evidence or information from the current inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated any serious risks or concerns. All five domains (Safe, Effective, Responsive, Caring and Well-Led) remain Good. This means the service is still rated Good overall.

Why the service is rated Good

The provider and registered manager were experienced at delivering care and support to people living with a mental illness. Both of them worked together, as well as with staff and professionals, to ensure they delivered care which really reflected the person’s needs.

There was a clear vision for the service which was developed by and shared with people and staff to ensure that it was agreed and understood. The vision described how the service was empowering for people, person centred and inclusive. People’s achievements were recognised and celebrated. Care records including risk assessments and support plans clearly described how the person was supported to be as independent as possible. People’s ambitions and preferences were recorded which ensured that staff had information to support people both when they were well and when their mental or physical health deteriorated.

Feedback from people using the service, visitors and professionals was all very positive. People described how they loved living at Lyndale and felt very well supported by the registered manager and staff.

The home was clean, comfortable and well maintained. People described Lyndale as “their home” and were clearly at ease and comfortable both in communal areas and their bedrooms which they had personalised.

Health professionals were very complimentary about the service and described how the staff were very professional, caring and effective. They also described how staff always ensured they proactively contacted and worked with health professionals to support people to maintain their health and wellbeing.

People were encouraged to stay healthy both physically and mentally. Staff supported them with this while recognising the rights of people to choose. Staff spent a lot of time encouraging people to consider their physical health, including their diet and exercise.

Staff were very skilled at supporting people who live with mental illness. Staff anticipated and supported people when they became mentally unwell to minimise the risks of a significant episode of mental illness.

Staff encouraged people to take part in social activities both inside and outside the home. Staff were innovative about engaging people in new ideas and experiences, such as food from around the world and a “Pride” event.

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

There were sufficient staff to support people safely. Staff had been recruited safely and undertook training to ensure they had the necessary skills and knowledge. Health professionals said staff really got to know people well and were knowledgeable about the signs which indicated a person was becoming unwell.

People were supported to receive safe care which responded to their needs. This included support with medicines and attending appointments with health professionals. Care plans clearly described people’s risks needs and preferences. Car plans were reviewed on a regular basis to ensure they provided up to date information about each person’s care.

One person was supported to have a peaceful and caring end of life surrounded by people they knew and in a place they considered to be their home. People living in the home who were affected by bereavement were actively supported by to deal with their grief.

Staff understood their responsibilities to ensure vulnerable people were safeguarded from the risks of abuse.

Quality assurance and governance systems were embedded. The provider, registered manager and staff were all involved in checks and audits to monitor the quality of care provided and the home’s safety and comfort. Where issues were identified, action was taken to address them. Feedback from people, visitors, staff and professionals was used to improve the quality of the service. There were systems to monitor accidents and incidents. This included reviews which identified ways to reduce future risks.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.