Archived: The New Lodge Nursing Home

Updated 9 May 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.

We inspected The New Lodge Nursing Home on the 5 March 2018 and was unannounced. We returned to complete our inspection on 6 March 2018.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector, a Specialist Advisor (the Specialist Advisor had experience working and caring for people who have nursing needs) 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.

We used the information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. 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.

We looked at the information held about the provider and the service including statutory notifications and enquiries relating to the service. Statutory notifications include information about important events which the provider is required to send us. We used this information to help us plan this inspection.

We contacted commissioners and health care professionals by e-mail requesting feedback about the service.

We spoke with three people who used the service and the family members of six people who were visiting when we inspected. We spoke with the nominated individual (director), registered manager (matron), a nurse, a senior care assistant, a care assistant, the activity organiser, the cook, the team leader and the quality assurance officer.

We reviewed the care records of four people who used the service. We looked at four staff records, which included their recruitment, induction, on-going monitoring and training. We looked at the minutes of staff meetings involving family members of those using the service. We examined documents which recorded how the provider monitored the quality of the service being provided. We also attended the ‘Friends of The Lodge’ meeting, which took place on 5 March 2018.

Updated 9 May 2018

The New Lodge Nursing Home had a registered manager. 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.

The New Lodge Nursing Home accommodates up to 28 people in an adapted building. At the time of the inspection 27 people were using the service. People using the service have an identified nursing need, which includes people living with dementia, a physical disability, head or brain injury or neurological condition or disease.

The New Lodge Nursing Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The New Lodge Nursing Home was registered by the Care Quality Commission on 28 October 2016. This is the service’s first inspection since being registered. The service was inspected on 5 and 6 March 2018 and was unannounced.

People using the service and family members were overwhelmingly complimentary about the service. They praised staff for the compassion and kindness shown to their relatives and to themselves, which included the respect and consideration shown to those who had died and the events which took place to remember those who had died.

Family members had confidence in the knowledge and skills of staff, and the positive impact this had on care. Family members spoke of the collaborative approach of the staff and other health care professionals and the positive impact it had on care. Family members told us the service provided was tailored to people’s individual needs and that they had complete confidence in the staff, whom they trusted and felt safe with.

Information we received from external stakeholders, which included health care professionals was positive. They spoke of the collaborative approach adopted by the nominated individual and registered manager in seeking the best outcomes for people using the service by working in partnership with them.

Staff demonstrated a commitment in the implementation of the values of the service and their determination in delivering personalised and high quality care. Staff’s knowledge of people’s individual needs was comprehensive and understood by staff, who provided people’s care and support based on their individualised care plan.

The open and inclusive approach adopted by the nominated individual, registered manager and staff, meant people using the service and family members were confident that they could raise any concern they had. The registered manager had investigated concerns that had been made. Any information gathered following these investigations were used to improve the service provided and shared with staff.

The management structure of the service meant there was strong, clear and visible leadership. All staff had specific areas of responsibility and worked consistently with the values of the service in the delivery of high quality and personalised care. There were robust systems to measure the quality of the service, and opportunities were provided for those using the service, their family members and staff to comment upon and influence the development of the service.

The building and equipment was maintained and clean to promote people’s safety. Staff had received training on how to identify potential abuse and knew how to alert the appropriate person or external authority should they have any concerns.

Risks to people were identified promptly and effective and robust plans were put in place to minimise these risks, involving relevant people, such as people’s family members and other professionals. Comprehensive information was in place to guide staff, in the most effective approach when using equipment. Information to support people safely with on-going health related conditions was documented. People were supported to take their medicine by staff and medicines systems were robust.

We found there were sufficient staff who had undergone a robust recruitment process to be employed to meet people’s needs. The nominated individual and registered manager were committed to the development of staff, through on-going training and supervision and had set up for the benefit of staff the ‘staff forum’. Staff were encouraged to develop to their full potential and were provided with opportunities to progress in their chosen career in care.

People’s needs were assessed and regularly reviewed to ensure people received effective care. Staff encouraged and supported people to eat a healthy diet. Where people had their nutritional needs delivered by a route other than by mouth, comprehensive and detailed risk assessments and care plans were in place. People's dietary requirements along with their likes and dislikes with regards to food and drink were recorded. The cook provided ‘home made’ meals. People were supported to access a range of health care professionals and staff worked in partnership with external agencies to ensure and promote people’s well-being.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrict way possible. The staff team supported people to make decisions about their day to day care and support. They were aware of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 ensuring people's human rights were protected. Where people lacked the capacity to make their own decisions, we saw decisions had been made for them in their best interest and where appropriate family members were involved in decisions about their relatives care.

People were treated with kindness and their individuality respected. Staff promoted people’s dignity and all interactions between staff, those using the service and family members were positive to ensure the best outcome for people.

Opportunities were provided for people to take part in activities within the service and the wider community. People were seen taking part in an art and craft session, whilst others who were in their room listened to music or watched the television. Family members were actively involved in the organising of events within the service and shared ideas as to activities their relative would wish to take part in within the wider community, which included day trips.