Kathleens Lodge Rest Home Ltd

Updated 20 July 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. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

This inspection was carried out by one inspector 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.

Service and service type:

Kathleens Lodge Rest 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 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:

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection:

Before, during and following the inspection visit we gathered information from a number of sources. We contacted the local authority quality team for their feedback and spoke with other professionals supporting people at the home, to gain further information. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection:

We spoke with two visiting healthcare professionals and the registered manager (who was also the nominated individual). The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider. We also spoke with the provider, three members of care staff, one visiting relative and nine people living at the service. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We reviewed a range of records. This included four people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at two staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision and a variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures.

After the inspection:

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found. We looked at training data, team meeting minutes, business continuity plan, competency assessments, service user guide and surveys and questionnaires. This information was emailed to the inspection team after the inspection.

Updated 20 July 2019

About the service:

Kathleens Lodge Rest Home is a residential care home providing personal care to 20 people in one adapted building. Care and support was provided to people living with dementia and other health care conditions. The service can support up to 20 people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found:

People’s experience of using the service was positive. People told us they felt safe living at the service and observations confirmed this. One person told us, “We are like one big family here. We are treated well.”

Quality assurance systems were in place, but these were not always effective in driving improvement and identifying shortfalls. For example, care plan audits failed to identify differences within documentation. We have a recommendation about the management and completion of audits.

People were supported to make decisions and they were helped to know their rights by staff. Staff received the training they needed to make sure they had the skills to support people's needs. There was an open culture, led by the registered manager who was described by staff as being approachable and supportive. People knew the registered manager, who often provided their support, and were relaxed in their company.

Medicines were well managed and safely stored and administered. Healthcare professionals were involved as needed and people were supported to maintain a healthy, balanced diet.

There were enough staff to make sure people's needs were met. Staff were also able to spend quality time with people chatting and enjoying each other's company. A dedicated activity coordinator was in post and a wide range of activities was available to promote people’s wellbeing.

People and relatives said staff treated them and their loved ones kindly. All the interactions we observed were respectful and professional. People's dignity and independence were respected.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection:

The last rating for this service was Good (published 21 November 2017)

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.