Archived: South Africa Lodge

Updated 28 December 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection team consisted of one inspector. one assistant inspector and two Experts 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 service did not have a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided. However, the manager had submitted an application to CQC to become the registered manager.

South Africa 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.

Notice of inspection:

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection:

Before the inspection we reviewed the information, we held about the service and the service provider. The registered provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We looked at the notifications we had received for this service. Notifications are information about important events the service is required to send us by law. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection we observed how staff interacted with people. We spoke with 10 people and seven relatives to gather their views. We looked at records, which included 10 people's care and medicines records. We checked recruitment records for seven staff. We looked at a range of records about how the service was managed. We also spoke with the provider, the manager, two clinical leads and six staff.

We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us to understand the experience of people who cannot talk with us.

Updated 28 December 2019

About the service

South Africa Lodge is a residential care home that was providing nursing and personal care for up to 94 older people, some who may also be living with dementia. There were 89 people living in the home at the time of our inspection. The home was laid out over two floors and consists of six lodges. People are placed in the lodges according to need, presentation and specific requirements. The service provides a specialist service for people with neurological degenerative conditions.

Although the service was not a Learning Disabilities service, it did support a small number of people who had learning disabilities. Therefore, Registering the Right Support (RRS) applies to this service. The service was registered before Registering the Right Support was developed. Therefore, the service has not been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support (RRS). Although the size and structure of the service was not in line with the principles of Registering the Right Support, staff delivered care in a person-centred way that offered people choice and control. The outcomes for people reflected and were underpinned by the principles and values of Registering the Right Support.

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

People and their relatives were very positive about the service and the care provided. People were cared for by staff who knew how to keep them safe and protect them from avoidable harm. People received their medicines regularly.

People's dignity, confidentiality and privacy were respected, and their independence was promoted. People's rights to make their own decisions were respected. 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.

The service continued to be effective. People's needs were assessed, and care was planned and delivered to meet legislation and good practice guidance. Care was delivered by staff who were well trained and knowledgeable about people's care and support needs.

Incidents and accidents were investigated, and actions were taken to prevent recurrence. Enough staff were available to meet people's needs and people told us when they needed assistance, staff responded promptly. The premises were clean, and staff followed infection control and prevention procedures.

People were encouraged to maintain a good diet and access health services when required. People had access to a wide range of activities and were supported to avoid social isolation.

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 21 June 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.