Background to this inspection
Updated
12 March 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. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
Inspection team:
The inspection was conducted by one inspector and an Expert by Experience with experience of care of older people and those living with dementia. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.’
Service and service type:
The Lodge is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. 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.
Notice of inspection:
The inspection was unannounced.
What we did:
We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. This included details about incidents the provider must notify us about, such as abuse; and we sought feedback from the local authority. We assessed the information in the provider information return. This is key information providers are required to send us about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections.
During the inspection, we spoke with nine people who used the service, to ask about their experience of the care provided and eight visiting family members. We observed staff providing support to people in the communal areas of the service. This was so we could understand people's experiences. By observing the care received, we could determine whether or not they were comfortable with the support they were provided with.
We spoke with six members of staff including the deputy manager, care staff, a housekeeper and an activities coordinator. We also spoke with the registered manager.
We reviewed a range of records about people's care and how the service was managed. This included looking at three people's care records and a sample of people’s medicines administration records. We reviewed records of meetings, staff rotas and staff training records. We also reviewed the records of accidents, incidents, complaints and quality assurance audits the management team had completed.
Updated
12 March 2019
About the service: The Lodge was a residential care home that was providing personal and nursing care for 39 people at the time of the inspection, some of whom were living with dementia. Accommodation was provided in a purpose built home across two floors, with communal areas on each floor.
People’s experience of using this service:
People and their relatives were very positive about the service and the care provided. A relative said, “I think the care is excellent. I can’t think of anything they could do better.” A person using the service summed it up in one phrase, “I am happy here.” Another person said, “The staff are marvellous; nothing is too much trouble.”
People were cared for by staff who knew how to keep them safe and protect them from avoidable harm. Sufficient staff were available to meet people’s needs and people told us when they needed assistance, staff responded promptly. People received their medicines regularly and systems were in place for the safe management and supply of medicines. Incidents and accidents were investigated and actions were taken to prevent recurrence. The premises were clean and staff followed infection control and prevention procedures.
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. People were provided with a nutritious and varied diet and they were complimentary about the quality and choice of food offered. 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. When people were unable to make decisions about their care and support, the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) were followed.
People were cared for by staff who were kind and compassionate. The atmosphere within the home was friendly and welcoming and staff were warm and considerate towards the people they cared for. People and their relatives felt involved and supported in decision making. People’s privacy was respected and their dignity maintained.
Staff were responsive to people’s individual needs and wishes and had an in-depth knowledge about each person. A person said, “Nothing is too much trouble for them.” Staff engaged with people very well and offered them choices on an ongoing basis. People had access to a range of activities and entertainment that they enjoyed. People’s views and concerns were listened to and action was taken to improve the service as a result.
The service continued to be well led and benefitted from clear and consistent leadership. The registered manager was praised by people, their relatives and staff, for their positive and supportive approach and their prompt resolution of issues. Systems were in place to monitor the quality of care provided and continuously improve the service. The management team and staff engaged well with other services and had developed positive relationships.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection: Good (report published in July 2016)
Why we inspected: This was a scheduled 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 re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.