Archived: Lodge Care Home

The Lodge Care Home is registered to provide accommodation for persons who require personal care. It can provide accommodation for up to 35 people some of whom maybe living with dementia. On the days of our inspection 25 people were using the service.

At our last inspection the service was given a Requires Improvement rating. At this inspection we saw that improvements had been made and the service was rated as Good. The service did not currently have a registered manager. The service was working to address this in due course.

The service was safe. Staff were deployed appropriately to meet people’s needs. Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. People’s needs were met by staff who had been recruited and employed after appropriate checks had been completed. Medication was dispensed by staff who had received training to do so.

The service was effective. People were cared for and supported by staff who had received training to support people to meet their needs. People were safeguarded from the potential of harm and their freedoms protected. Staff were provided with training in Safeguarding Adults from Abuse, Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Nutritional needs were supported and people had access to healthcare when required.

The service was caring. Staff were attentive to people's needs. Staff were able to demonstrate that they knew people well. Staff treated people with dignity and respect.

The service was responsive. People were provided with the opportunity to participate in activities which interested them at the service. These activities were diverse in meeting people’s social needs. People knew how to make a complaint should they need to.

The service was well-led. There is an interim manager in post until a new registered manager is recruited. The manager had quality monitoring processes in place to monitor and drive improvements at the service. The manager had a number of ways of gathering people’s views including talking with people, staff, and relatives.

Lodge Care Home provides accommodation and personal care for up to 36 older people and people who may be living with dementia. The service does not provide nursing care. At the time of our inspection there were 33 people using the service.

There was a registered manager in post at the service. 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.

There were sufficient staff who had been recruited safely and who had the skills and knowledge to provide care and support in ways that people preferred but improvements about the way staff were deployed needed to be sustained over time.

Input from relevant health professionals such as the Speech and Language Therapy team (SALT) was needed so that people’s nutritional needs could be managed effectively.

The adaptations and design of the premises met people’s needs and promoted their independence. Improvements needed to continue to enable people to make full use of the facilities available, such as the completion of the kitchen area near the upstairs lounge.

The provider had systems in place to check the quality of the service and take the views and concerns of people and their relatives into account to make improvements to the service.

People were safe because the management team and staff understood their responsibilities in identifying abuse or poor practice.

The provider had systems in place to manage medicines and people were supported to take their prescribed medicines safely.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which apply to care homes. We found the provider was following the MCA code of practice.

People were treated with kindness and respect by staff who knew them well.

Staff respected people’s choices and took their preferences into account when providing support. People were encouraged to enjoy pastimes they enjoyed and were supported to maintain relationships so that they were not socially isolated.

Staff were supported by the management team.

This is a summary of what we found:

Is the service safe?

Records showed that the temperature of fridges and freezers were checked regularly and that the temperature of cooked meals was recorded to ensure that these were safe and well cooked. This told us people's meals and food in the service was safe.

The service regularly reviewed the required number of staff needed to provide care and took steps to provide these staff. Staff were provided with regular days off and only where it was judged safe by the provider did staff work longer hours. The service made use of additional safety equipment and call alarms along with waking night staff to support and keep people safe at night.

The service was clean and free of offensive odours and a dedicated cleaner had been appointed to the service.

Is the service effective?

We saw from recruitment records and staff rotas that the provider took all the necessary steps to ensure that people were safe because they had reviewed their staffing levels as the number of people who used the service increased and staff were recruited through a safe and effective recruitment process which included the required training to deliver safe and effective care.

Is the service caring?

We saw that people were relaxed in the company of each other and staff. Staff were attentive to people's needs. Staff we spoke with were able to demonstrate they knew people well. Staff treated people with dignity and respect. One person who used the service said, "The staff are really good." Another person told us, "The staff are marvellous."

Is the service responsive?

People's care records showed that the service weighed people regularly and where people required the support of external professionals the service contacted these professionals. This ensured that people received the care they needed to remain healthy.

People had a choice of what they wanted to eat at each meal time and we spoke with a person who used the service that followed a vegetarian diet. They told us that the service catered well for their chosen way of eating and they enjoyed the food. The chef told us that they could order any items they required for people's meals and were aware of people that required additional support with their meals, for example people that were diabetic and needed smaller desserts and less sugar.

People who used the service were provided with the opportunity to participate in activities which interested them. People's choices were taken in to account and listened to. We saw from two people's records that the service kept detailed records of each person's activities and choices and we observed people partaking in different activities on the day of our inspection.

Is the service well-led?

We saw the quality of the service had been maintained. The registered manager and the provider were fully aware of all the people who used the service's needs and they held regular meetings with staff and relatives of people to ensure that people's choices were recorded and that people were happy. We saw the records of the most recent meetings. The newest staff member appointed that we spoke with told us that they felt well supported and that the manager and the provider were very approachable.

People we spoke with were positive about the care that they received and felt involved in planning how their care needs were met. One person told us: 'I love it here. The staff are wonderful'.

We found that care records were current and reflected the needs of people who lived in the home. Staff demonstrated a good understanding and knowledge of the care and support people required.

The medication administration, recording and storage were all in good order and ensured people received their medication as prescribed.

The premises were well maintained with work underway around the outside of the home and there was an on-going redecoration plan in place.

There was a recruitment procedure in place which ensured that only people suitable to work with vulnerable people were employed. Staff received a wide range of training which equipped them for their role.

Staffing number were adequate to meet the needs of the people currently living at Lodge Care Home.

The provider had a complaints system in place and people were given the opportunity to raise any concern or compliments they had.

A number of people were not able to tell us verbally about their experiences. However, we observed that they were relaxed and most staff interacted positively in different ways with people. For example, we saw a staff member recognise when someone was getting agitated and suggested they go for a walk which helped the person to calm down.

The provider was in the process of adding a further 16 bedrooms to the home and the work was due to be completed in December 2012. They told us that disruption to the service had been kept to a minimum and people's care arrangements were not affected. This was confirmed by a relative we spoke with.

Lodge Care Home had the necessary policies and procedures, records and quality assurance and monitoring systems in place for the protection of people who used the service. Staff were appropriately recruited in order to undertake their caring responsibilities and people and their families were involved in their care arrangements.