• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Loveys Lodge

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

14 Beresford Road, Bedford, Bedfordshire, MK40 3SD (01234) 214942

Provided and run by:
Mr Brian Taylor

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

All Inspections

12 November 2014

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 12 November 2014 and was unannounced.

Loveys Lodge is a care home for up to four people with a learning disability. There were three people living at the home at the time of our inspection who had lived together for 18 years. They were supported by a small number of staff, some of whom had worked at the home for a significant number of years.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At the last inspection of Loveys Lodge on 3 June 2014, we asked the provider to take action to make improvements to ensure people living in the home were safeguarded financially, and this action had been completed.

Everyone living at Loveys Lodge had complex needs, which meant they were not all able to talk to us about their experiences using words. We learnt from speaking with staff and looking at records that people were very dependent on staff to support them in all areas of their lives.

We found that staff had been trained to recognise signs of potential abuse and they demonstrated a good understanding of the potential risks faced by people living in the home.

Risk assessments were in place to manage identifiable risks in a way that did not restrict people’s freedom, choice and control more than necessary. Positive and effective strategies were observed in the way that staff managed behaviours that were potentially challenging.

There were sufficient numbers of staff who had the right skills and knowledge to carry out their roles and responsibilities. It was clear the staff understood people’s needs well and how to meet these.

Systems were in place to ensure people received their medication when they needed it and in a safe way.

We found that the service worked to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 key principles, which state that a person's capacity should always be assumed, and that assessments of capacity must be undertaken where it is believed that a person cannot make decisions about their care and support.

People were supported to have sufficient quantities of food and drink and there was an emphasis on maintaining a balanced diet.

Arrangements were in place to support people to maintain good health and to have access to external healthcare services and professionals, as required.

Staff were observed providing care and support in a caring and meaningful way, and people were treated with kindness and compassion. People also had regular opportunities to engage in activities within the local community.

We saw that people’s dignity was respected at all times and they were encouraged to maintain their independence as far as possible.

A complaints procedure had been developed to let people know how to raise concerns about the service if they needed to. The registered manager told us that no one had raised any concerns or made a complaint about the service in the last 12 months.

The registered manager encouraged open communication amongst the staff team. It was clear that she had a good working knowledge of the needs of the people living and working at the home, and that she provided appropriate support where required.

Systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service provided including satisfaction surveys, meetings and internal audits. We saw that relatives of people living in the home had provided positive feedback in terms of staff knowledge and approachability, feeling listened to and involved, opportunities for people to make their own choices, privacy and dignity for people and external activities.

3 June 2014

During a routine inspection

Our inspection was carried out by one inspector who visited the service unannounced. During the inspection we sought answers to five key questions; is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led? Below is a summary of what we found:

Is the service safe?

People were treated with dignity and respect by the staff. We saw that people who used the service were relaxed in the presence of staff and responded positively to them. Staff received training in safeguarding vulnerable adults and were aware of their responsibilities to report any suspicions of abuse. However, there were no checks or audits of the management of people's finances which left them at risk of financial abuse.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed and plans of care developed according to their needs and preferences. People's care needs were reviewed regularly which helped to ensure that people continued to receive care that was appropriate and effective.

Is the service caring?

We saw staff approach people who used the service in a caring manner. Staff knew about people's individual preferences, interests, and needs and where possible supported these. Staff were knowledgeable about the needs of people and the way they communicated and we saw staff use this knowledge and respond appropriately to requests for assistance.

Is the service responsive?

We saw that staff were available to support people who used the service and that they were responsive to indications that people needed support and assistance.

Is the service well-led?

We found that this small service was generally well managed. We saw that the manager carried out regular health and safety checks on the premises. The manager told us that the provider visited regularly and responded to any concerns, however there were no records of the visits confirming what checks on the quality of the service had been carried out during the visits.

29 April 2013

During a routine inspection

We inspected Loveys Lodge on 29 April 2013 and found a relaxed environment. At the time of our inspection, four people lived in the home, although three had left to attend the day centre. The remaining person was being taken swimming by the home manager after our visit. This person was not able to tell us about their experiences due to their learning disabilities and communication difficulties. However, we observed positive interactions with the staff member, and relaxed body language and smiling facial expressions.

All four people had lived together at Loveys Lodge for many years.

We saw evidence that consent was obtained from people before providing care and support through a Mental Capacity Act assessment (2005), or through use of people's communication methods, including facial expressions and body language.

We looked at the processes for managing medicines and found these to be managed safely, with staff who administered medicines, trained to do so.

We also looked at the processes in place for managing complaints should they arise. However, from the records we saw, the service had not had a complaint made for many years.

16 October 2012

During a routine inspection

During our visit to Loveys Lodge on 16 October 2012, we observed people receiving care and support on a 24 hours basis, in a friendly, homely atmosphere. Four people lived at Loveys Lodge and whilst they were not able to tell us about their experiences due to their learning disabilities and communication difficulties, we observed them expressing their feelings through facial expressions, body language, and communication methods appropriate for them. Everyone was smiling and looked well cared for.

All the people had lived at the home for a number of years and we found staff providing care and support were very knowledgeable about each person's needs.

One person who was able to communicate verbally had attended the day care centre and returned during our visit. This person told us they were happy living in the home and staff were good to them.