We carried out a review of the data available to us about Cedar Lodge 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 Cedar Lodge, you can give feedback on this service.
Cedar Lodge is a residential care home providing personal care to up to nine people who live with learning disabilities and autism. At the time of the inspection there were six people 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.
The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties. The size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the building design and was separate from other buildings on the site, which provided a sense of space and privacy for the people living at the home.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were supported by staff who understood people’s individual safety needs and who helped people to reduce their individual safety risks. Staff knew what action to take if they had any concerns for people’s well-being. People were assisted to have the medicines they needed to remain well and to live in a home where systems were in place to reduce the chance of infections.
Staff worked with people, their relatives and other health and social care professionals to ensure people’s needs were regularly assessed and people had access to the health care they needed. Staff used their skills and training when caring for people, and to ensure people were assisted to have enough to eat and drink. 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 liked the staff supporting them and staff spoke warmly about the people they cared for. Relatives told us staff knew their family members well. Staff used their knowledge of people’s unique needs and communication preferences to included people in choices about their lives. Staff treated people respectfully and understood people’s right to privacy.
People’s preferences and needs were reflected in the way their care was planned. Relatives’ and other health and care professionals’ views were considered when their family member’s care was planned and reviewed. Systems were in place to manage any complaints and to take learning from these. 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 enjoy new experiences and maintain their independence.
The registered manager planned to further develop plans to support people at the end of their life, and in the event of people’s sudden death, so people's preferences would be known, and responded to.
Relatives were positive about the way the home was managed and told us communication with staff was open. Staff felt supported to provide good care. The registered manager was supported by the provider to check the quality of the care provided and to drive through improvements to the care provided. This included continuing to develop new opportunities for people to try, so they would continue to enjoy their lives.
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was Good (published 27 April 2017).
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Cedar Lodge provides accommodation and personal care for up to nine adults with learning disabilities or autism. The home is accessible for wheelchair users and is in a rural area on the border of Herefordshire and Shropshire. At the time our inspection there were five people using the service.
This service had not been previously inspected.
At the time of the inspection there was no registered manager in place at Cedar Lodge, as they had recently left the service. 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. A new manager had been appointed and was present throughout the inspection visit.
Both relatives, professionals and staff raised concerns regarding the continuity of registered managers. Since registration with CQC in June 2015, there had been three registered managers appointed to Cedar Lodge. The provider acknowledged people’s concerns about the turnover of managers, however expressed confidence with the new manager in delivering continuity and stability.
People told us they felt safe living at Cedar Lodge.
People’s safety and well-being had been assessed by the provider and risk assessments were in place to minimise any risks and keep them safe. People told us they had been fully consulted and involved in determining the nature of the risk and the action required by staff.
The provider ensured there were enough staff on duty to meet people's needs.
The provider carried out appropriate checks when recruiting new staff. Checks included their identity, previous employment history and at least two character references. The provider undertook a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check for each member of staff before they started working with people.
Where the provider administered people’s medicines, people told us they received their medicines when they need them.
People told us they felt staff were professional and, well trained to undertake their roles. Staff told us the training they received enabled them to have the right skills and knowledge to support people.
The provider understood and protected people’s rights under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff demonstrated a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act and confirmed they had received training.
People were supported to access healthcare from other professionals.
People were supported to maintain healthy diets and were assessed for their nutrition and hydration needs.
People received care and support that took into account their specific needs and preferences. People told us they were actively involved in the care they or their relative received.
Staff promoted people’s independence and always respected their wishes. Staff were knowledgeable about the people they supported, which enabled them to provide a personalised and responsive service.
People and their relatives told us that staff supported them to pursue their interests, and had organised weekly schedules to follow.
The provider had systems in place to seek out people’s views and experiences of their care, and address any concerns or complaints they may have. People told us they knew how to make a formal complaint as they had been provided with the relevant information from the provider.
The provider promoted an open and inclusive culture within the service. People and staff found the management team approachable and willing to listen.
The provider monitored the quality of the service by a variety of methods, including checks and feedback from people and their families.