Lynden Hill Clinic

Updated 19 March 2025

Date of Assessment: 26 March to 2 April 2025. The service is a care home with nursing providing support to older people, younger adults and people with physical disabilities. The service provides short stays for respite, rehabilitation, therapies and nursing care.This assessment took place due to concerns received about people’s safety, care, risks and governance oversight at the service.

The provider was in breach of the legal regulations relating to safeguarding, staff recruitment, notification of reportable events and good governance. The provider and the registered manager did not demonstrate they had robust quality assurance systems and governance processes which operated across all levels of the service.. The registered manager did not ensure there was a good learning culture. People could raise concerns or complaints, however these were not always encouraged, listened to or relevant action taken in line with the provider’s policy and procedures. People were not always protected and kept safe. The registered manager did not ensure safeguarding procedures were followed and any allegations or incidents were reported to external agencies accordingly. The registered manager did not ensure they and the staff team consistently understood and managed risks to people’s health and welfare or that staff received consistent training and regular appraisals to maintain high-quality care. The registered manager did not always ensure there were enough staff with the right skills, qualifications and experience as they did not have oversight of staff’s training and support needs. Effective recruitment processes were not in place to ensure, as far as possible, that people were protected from unsuitable persons being employed. Management of medicines and premises was not always safe and not supported with consistent clear records. Staff did not always work well in partnership with other agencies such as GPs, pharmacies and other clinicians to promote and achieve positive outcomes for people. People and staff were not always encouraged to be actively involved in the development and continuous improvement of the service. CCTV was in use at the exterior entrance and communal areas but without an impact assessment on people’s privacy or clear policy on how to manage it.

Staff ensured people were protected from the risk of acquiring an infection during the provision of their care. The facilities and equipment were clean and well-maintained for infection risks to be mitigated. Staff supported people to access physiotherapy and worked well towards rehabilitation goals to improve mobility and confidence.

Updated 19 March 2025

We spoke to people using the service during our site visit. While the people expressed that they were generally happy with their care, our assessment found some elements of care did not meet the expected standards.People were mostly supported to have choice and control of their lives and in their best interests; but the policies and systems in the service did not support the practice and oversight of people’s care and treatment.People were not always supported by staff or the registered manager to express their views and to be involved in decisions about their care. People felt they could speak to staff. However, there was no real structure to gather people’s feedback and use it to improve and develop the service.People did not always have clear and detailed plans of care and risk assessments. This did not always ensure people received personalised care which should be responsive to their needs. People's concerns and complaints were not always encouraged, listened to and we were not assured relevant action was taken in line with the provider’s policy and procedures.People were supported to eat and drink sufficiently for their needs and they were complimentary of that experience. Staff supported people to see some healthcare professionals in order to maintain good health and wellbeing. People reported to us they were treated in a caring and kind manner by staff. People agreed staff ensured people's privacy and dignity were upheld and independence promoted during the provision of their personal care. People's human rights were respected and supported, and people told us they did not feel they experienced any discrimination or inequalities while staying at the service.