Hansa Lodge

Updated 15 December 2018

The inspection: We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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.

Inspection team: There was one inspector.

Service and service type: Farm Lodge is a care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service 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.

Notice of inspection: We gave the service 24 hours’ notice of the inspection visit because it is small and the manager may have been out of the office. We needed to be sure that they would be in to assist us with our inspection.

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. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We assessed the information we require providers to send us annually that gives us key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection, we spoke with two people who used the service about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with five members of staff including a carer, an administrator, a team leader, an area manager and the registered manager. During the inspection we reviewed a range of records. This included three people's care records and medicines records. We also looked at six staff files, records relating to the management of the home and a variety of policies and procedures developed and implemented by the provider.

Updated 15 December 2018

What life is like for people using this service:

The service was new and had been running for twelve months at the time of our inspection. The property was clean, comfortable and spacious, with plenty of room for people to live. There had been initial challenges for the service, with management embedding new systems and some turnover of staff as the provider wanted to ensure the right employees were supporting people. The Care Quality Commission had been made aware of safeguarding concerns, but were confident the service had acted appropriately with the people’s best interest in mind.

There had recently been a change of registered manager, though from our observation there was little impact on people, staff and systems in the service as the previous registered manager was able to assist with the induction of the new registered manager.

People told us they felt safe and happy and the service was their home. One person told us, “This is one of the best places I’ve been, so homely, so beautiful.” There were safeguarding systems and processes in places that sought to protect people from harm. Staff knew the signs of abuse and what to do if they suspected it. There were sufficient staff in place, all of whom had passed robust recruitment procedures to ensure they were suitable for the role. There were systems in place to monitor people’s safety and promote their health and wellbeing, these included online risk assessments and care plans. The provider ensured that when things went wrong, these incidents and accidents were recorded and lesson were learned.

People needs were assessed in detail before moving into the service so the provider knew whether they could best meet a person’s needs. Staff were sufficiently skilled and experienced to fulfil their roles, received training and were supported through supervision and appraisal. People were prompted to eat and drink healthily and could choose what foods they wanted to eat. 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.

People were treated kindly and compassionately by staff. People were supported to express their views and make decisions about the care and treatment they received. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and supported them to be as independent as possible.

People received personalised care, having their support needs and preferences detailed in their care plans. People were supported to lead meaningful and fulfilled lives through activities of their choice. The provider had a complaints policy and process in place and people told us they would feel comfortable raising complaints. There were no people at end of life but the provider had policies in place should they need to support someone in that position.

People and staff thought highly of the registered manager and that the service was well managed. Staff knew their roles and understood what was expected of them. The registered manager knew their responsibilities in ensuring people received a safe, high quality service. People and staff were engaged in the service and their opinions were sought. There were quality assurance systems in place to assist the provider to monitor and improve its care and treatment of people. The service had built local community links to benefit the lives of people using the service.

This service met characteristics of Good in all areas; More information in ‘Detailed Findings’ below.

Rating at last inspection: This is the first inspection of this service.

About the service: Farm Lodge is a residential care home that provides personal care for up to five people with Learning Disabilities. At the time of the inspection three people lived at the service.

Why we inspected: This was a planned comprehensive inspection that was scheduled to take place in line with Care Quality Commission scheduling guidelines for adult social care services.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor the service to ensure it meets its regulatory requirements