Archived: Crantock Lodge

Updated 17 November 2018

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.

This unannounced inspection took place on 30 October 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 experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of service. Their area of expertise was in older people’s care.

We reviewed the Provider Information Record (PIR) and previous inspection reports before the inspection. The PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and the improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed the information we held about the service and notifications of incidents we had received. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to send us by law.

During the inspection we spoke with eight people and four visitors. We checked the premises and observed care practices during our visit. We also spoke with the registered providers, the manager, the cook and five care staff.

We looked at three people’s care plans and associated records, Medicine Administration Records (MAR), three staff recruitment files, staff duty rosters, staff training records and records relating to the running of the service.

Updated 17 November 2018

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of Crantock Lodge on 30 October 2018. Crantock Lodge is a ‘care home’ that provides care for a maximum of 14 adults. 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.

At the time of the inspection there were 10 people living at the service, some of whom were living with dementia. The accommodation is over two floors with a shared lounge and dining room on the ground floor. The first floor is accessed either by a passenger lift or stairs, which are fitted with a stair lift.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and on-going monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

We spent most of the inspection in the shared lounge and dining room observing and talking with people. There was a calm and relaxed atmosphere at the service throughout the day of the inspection visit. People and staff welcomed us into the service and were happy talk to us about their views of living and working there.

People received care and support that met their needs because staff had the skills and knowledge to provide responsive and personalised care. People, and their relatives, told us they were happy with the care they received and believed it was a safe environment. Comments included, “You couldn’t wish for more than we have here”, “I love everything about it here. We are lucky to have this place”, “I like things right and they are right here”, “It’s very, very good here. I get on well with the carers” and “I have a lovely room. I like it here, no problems.”

People’s care plans contained personalised information about their individual needs and wishes and they were involved in the planning and reviewing of their care. These care plans gave direction and guidance for staff to follow to help ensure people received their care and support in the way they wanted.

Incidents and accidents were logged, investigated and action taken to keep people safe. Risks were clearly identified and included guidance for staff on the actions they should take to minimise any risk of harm. Risk assessments had been kept under review and were relevant to the care provided.

Safe arrangements were in place for the storing and administration of medicines. People were supported to access to healthcare services such as occupational therapists, GPs, chiropodists, community nurses and dentists. Staff enabled people to eat a healthy and varied diet. People told us they enjoyed their meals and there were ample choices on offer.

There were activities available for people to take part in such as, board games, cards, arts and crafts, quizzes and external entertainers. Staff supported people to keep in touch with family and friends and people told us their friends and family were able to visit at any time.

Management and staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff on duty to meet people’s needs in a timely manner. Staff knew how to recognise and report the signs of abuse. Staff were supported to develop the necessary skills to carry out their roles through a system of induction, training, supervision and staff meetings.

There was a positive culture within the staff team and the management provided supportive leadership. There were opportunities for staff to raise any concerns or ideas about how the service could be developed. People and their relatives described the management of the service as open and approachable.

There were effective quality assurance systems in place to make sure that any areas for improvement were identified and addressed. The service had a suitable complaints procedure.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.