We carried out a review of the data available to us about 167 Lodge Hill on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about 167 Lodge Hill, you can give feedback on this service.
167 Lodge Hill is a residential care home providing personal care and support to five people with physical and learning disabilities with complex communication and visual impairment needs. The home is a purpose-built bungalow with six bedrooms all set on the same floor. The service can support up to six people.
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
Relatives were complimentary about the service and told us their loved one’s care need were met. However, the home environment required improvement to ensure the safety and cleanliness was brought up to the required standards.
Relatives told us people were safe using the service. Staff understood their responsibility to protect people in their care from abuse and report any concerns they had. People were supported to take their medicines safely. There were enough staff available to support people's needs.
Before people started using the service, their needs were assessed to ensure they could be met. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People received care and support from staff that had the knowledge and skills to meet their individual needs. People were supported to eat healthily, and they had access healthcare services when required.
People were supported by staff that were kind and caring towards them, respected their privacy and dignity and where capable, promoted their independence. Staff were caring towards people’s diverse needs and supported people without discrimination. People's communication needs had been assessed and met. People were supported to participate in activities that interested them, and relatives knew how to complain if they were unhappy.
The service had an effective system in place to assess and monitor the quality of the care delivery and had worked in partnership with key organisations to plan and deliver an effective service. People and their relatives' views had been sought and their feedback had been used to improve the quality of care and support provided.
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 25 January 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.
At our last comprehensive inspection on 6 and 7 August 2015 we had found a breach of regulations as where people did not have the capacity to consent, the provider had not always acted in accordance with legal requirements. We asked the provider for an action plan to address the breach identified. The provider sent us an action plan telling us how they would address this issue and when they would complete the action needed to remedy the concern.
This unannounced comprehensive inspection took place on 28 and 29 December 2016. At this inspection we checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA, and whether any conditions on authorisations to deprive a person of their liberty were being met. The provider had taken action to ensure the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were followed.
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.
Relatives of people who used the service told us they felt safe and that staff and the registered manager treated them well. The service had clear procedures to support staff to recognise and respond to abuse. The registered manager and staff completed safeguarding training. Staff completed risk assessments for every person who used the service which were up to date and included detailed guidance for staff to reduce risks. There was an effective system to manage accidents and incidents, and to reduce the likelihood of them happening again. The service had arrangements in place to deal with emergencies. The service carried out comprehensive background checks of staff before they started working and there were enough staff on duty to support to people when required. Staff supported people so that they took their medicines safely.
The service provided training, and supported staff through regular supervision and annual appraisal to help them undertake their role. Staff prepared, reviewed, and updated care plans for every person. The care plans were person centred and reflected people’s current needs.
Staff assessed people’s nutritional needs and supported them to have a balanced diet. Staff supported people to access the healthcare services they required and monitored their healthcare appointments.
People and their relatives where appropriate, were involved in the assessment, planning and review of their care. Staff considered people’s choices, health and social care needs, and their general wellbeing.
Staff supported people in a way which was kind, respectful and encouraged them to maintain their independence. Staff also protected people’s privacy and dignity.
The service supported people to take part in a range of activities in support of their need for social interaction and stimulation. The service had a clear policy and procedure about managing complaints. People knew how to complain and told us they would do so if necessary.
There was a positive culture at the home where people felt included and consulted. Relatives of people commented positively about staff and the registered manager. Staff felt supported by the registered manager.
The service sought the views of relatives of people who used the services and healthcare professionals to help drive improvements. The provider had effective systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of services people received, and to make improvements where required. Staff used the results of audits to identify how improvements could be made to the service. However, we found that the provider had not notified the Care Quality Commission (CQC) of the authorisations of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) as required. As a result of the inspection feedback, the provider then notified the CQC. We saw there was no negative impact on the people who used the services.
This unannounced inspection took place on 06 and 07 August 2015. At the last inspection on 07 August 2013, the service met all the regulations that we inspected.
167 Lodge Hill provides personal care and support for up to six adults who have a range of needs including learning disabilities. There were five people receiving personal care and support at the time of our inspection.
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.
People’s relatives said they felt their relatives were safe and staff treated their family member well. We observed that people looked happy and relaxed. There were clear procedures in place to recognise and respond to abuse and staff had been trained in how to follow these. Risk assessments were in place and reflected current risks for people who used the service and ways to try and reduce the risk from happening. Appropriate arrangements for the management of people’s medicines were in place and staff received training in administering medicines.
The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) are designed to protect people who may not have the ability to make decisions for themselves. We found the service had not taken appropriate action at all times to ensure the requirements for MCA 2005 and DoLS were followed.
Staff received an induction when they first started working at the service and received further training to help them undertake their role. Staff received additional support through regular supervision and team meetings.
Staff knew people’s needs well and treated them in a kind and dignified manner. People’s relatives told us their family members were happy and well looked after. They felt confident they could share any concerns and these would be acted upon. Staff were able to respond to people’s communication needs and provided appropriate support to those who required assistance with their meals. People received enough to eat and drink and their preferences were taken into account.
There was a positive culture at the service where people felt included and consulted. Relatives commented positively about the management of the service. There was an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service provided.
We found one breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) regulations 2014.You can see what action we took at the back of the full version of this report.
We found that people, their relatives and representatives were involved in planning the care and support that was in place for them. People who used the service had an individual care plan with relevant risk assessments in place which was regularly reviewed to meet their needs. There were policies and procedures in place for safeguarding vulnerable adults and staff we spoke with were aware of their responsibility to prevent and protect people from abuse. Staff were supported through induction, training, supervision and team meeting. People's care and support plans, staff records and other records used in managing the service were mostly up to date and fit for purpose.
We observed that the staff treated people in a respectful manner and people seemed to be relaxed and comfortable in the placement. Family members and carers we spoke with said that they had been kept informed and updated about any changes or developments in the care needs of their relation. People also said that members of staff had spent time caring for their relative whilst the person was admitted to hospital.