• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Lakeside Care Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Lower Maddaford, Southcott, Okehampton, Devon, EX20 4NL (01837) 52078

Provided and run by:
Roger Langbridge and Partners

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 18 May 2016

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.

The inspection took place on 31 March and 1 April 2016. One adult social care inspector completed the inspection.

Before our inspection, we reviewed information we held about the home, which included incident notifications they had sent us and a Provider Information Return (PIR). A notification is information about important events which the service is required to tell us about by law. A PIR is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

A number of people living at the service were unable to communicate their experience of living at the home in detail as they were living with dementia. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people, who could not comment directly on their experience.

We spoke with six people using the service who were able to comment directly on their experience, and one person’s relative. We looked at the records and risk assessments for three people. We spoke with four staff members, the registered manager, general manager and provider. We looked at records connected with how the home was run, including training and recruitment records, and quality monitoring surveys. We received feedback from two community health care professionals.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 18 May 2016

The inspection took place on 31 March and 1 April 2016 and was unannounced . Our previous inspection in May 2014, found the service to be meeting the regulations inspected of the Health and Social Care Act (2008).

Lakeside is a family run business. It is registered to provide accommodation and personal care to a maximum of 29 people, most of whom are older people living with conditions associated with ageing. It is not a nursing home and health care needs are met through community health care professionals. There were 28 people resident at the time of the inspection.

The service is required to have 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. There was a registered manager at the home.

The risk from Legionella was not being managed and fire safety was being compromised because doors were wedged open. One complaint allegation, which might have indicated abuse or mistreatment was not handled in line with local authority guidelines, however this was fully investigated by the registered manager. All other risks and quality assurance processes were well managed by the provider and registered manager.

People’s choices were consistently respected by the staff and people were consenting to the care they received. People’s capacity to make decisions was assessed and decisions were made in people’s best interest where appropriate. Staff had checked who had authority to make decisions on people’s behalf if they lacked capacity to provide informed consent.

People’s health care needs were under regular review and they were supported to maintain their health. Health care professionals were positive about the service people received.

People were protected through the arrangements for staff recruitment, training, supervision and support. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs, usually in a timely manner.

People received the support they needed with their medicines, which were safely handled on their behalf.

People’s nutritional needs were met by staff who understood how to provide a healthy, well balanced diet. People enjoyed a wide variety of food and drink and any individual preferences were met where possible.

People’s views were regularly sought through meetings, care plan reviews and survey questionnaires.

There was a programme of daily activities for people, which included regular contact with the local community. Where possible, any individual preferences were met. The home environment was pleasant, fresh and well furnished and promoted a social and comfortable life for people.

People said they could raise any concern or complaint and were confident they would receive a satisfactory response.

Good relationships had been built between people using the service and the staff. Staff provided compassionate care. They were kind, respectful and dedicated to the people in their care. This was led from the top. People and their family members spoke very highly of the service and benefitted from the open approach of the home’s management.

There were two breaches of regulation. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of this report.