7 and 9 October 2015
During a routine inspection
The inspection visit took place on 7 and 9 October 2015 and was unannounced.
Florence Lodge is a care home service that does not provide nursing care. The home can accommodate up to 25 people. There are two lounges and a dining room and a garden for people to enjoy.
There was a registered manager in place. 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.
At the last inspection on 24 June 2013 the service was meeting the requirements of the regulations that were inspected at that time.
There were 25 people living there at the time of our inspection. People who lived at the home, relatives and friends told us people felt safe and secure with staff to support them. We found people’s care and support needs had been assessed before they moved into the home. Care records we looked at contained details of people’s preferences, interests, likes and dislikes.
We observed staff interaction with people during our inspection visit, spoke with staff, people who lived at the home and relatives. We found staffing levels and the skills mix of staff were sufficient to meet the needs of people and keep them safe. The recruitment of staff had been undertaken through a thorough process. We found required checks had been completed prior to staff commencing work. This was confirmed by talking with staff members.
We observed medication was being dispensed and administered in a safe manner. We observed the person responsible for administering medication dealt with one person at a time to minimise risks associated with this process. We discussed training and found any person responsible for administering medicines had received formal medication training to ensure they were confident and competent to give medication to people.
People were asked for their consent before care was provided. However, not all staff were aware of their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff who had the knowledge, skills and experience to carry out their role. People told us that there were always staff available to help them when needed. Relatives of people who used the service told us that they visited the home at different times and on different days, and the staff always made them feel welcome. They said that staff were caring and treated people with respect, and that their relative was always comfortable and looked well cared for.
Staff were provided with relevant induction and training to make sure they had the right skills and knowledge for their role. Staff understood their role and what was expected of them. They were happy in their work, motivated and had confidence in the way the service was managed.
People had access to a range of health care professionals to help maintain their health. A varied and nutritious diet was provided to people. This took into account their dietary needs and preferences so that their health was promoted and choices respected.
People told us they could speak with staff if they had any worries or concerns and felt confident they would be listened to.
People were able to participate in a range of daily activities both in and outside of the home which were meaningful and promoted independence.
There were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. Regular checks and audits were undertaken to make sure full and safe procedures were adhered to.
People using the service and their relatives had been asked for their opinion via surveys, the results of these had been audited to identify any areas for improvement.