• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Loughton Hall

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Rectory Lane, Loughton, Essex, IG10 3RU (020) 8502 0772

Provided and run by:
Veecare Ltd

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

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 12 September 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

The inspection was carried out by two inspectors.

Service and service type

Loughton Hall is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as 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

We used information the registered persons sent us in their Provider Information Return. This is information we require registered persons to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections.

We reviewed other information we held about the service. This included notifications of incidents that the registered persons had sent us since our inspection in October 2016. These are events that happened in the service that the registered persons are required to tell us about.

We invited feedback from the commissioning bodies who contributed to purchasing some of the care provided by the service. We did this so that they could tell us their views about how well the service was meeting people's needs and wishes. We used all this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

During the inspection, we spoke with 10 people, three relatives, three care staff, the activity coordinator, the deputy and the registered manager. We also spoke with a visiting minister and healthcare professional.

We reviewed a range of records, these included five people's care and medicines records as well as some risk assessments for other people. We checked that all staff were appropriately trained. We reviewed records about the management of the service, quality assurance records and a variety of policies and procedures. We also looked at other records such as minutes of resident and staff meetings where they had shared their views.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found in terms of reducing potential risk by fitting some stair gates.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 12 September 2019

About the service

People’s experience of using services and what we found

People were safe. Staff knew what their responsibilities were about keeping people safe from the risk of abuse. There were enough staff and the provider followed safe recruitment practice.

People received the support they needed to stay healthy and to access healthcare services. Each person had an up to date care plan, which set out how their care and support needs should be met by staff. These were reviewed regularly.

Medicines were managed safely, only trained staff gave medicines and their competency to do this was checked regularly.

People continued to receive care from staff who were well supported. Staff received one to one supervision and annual appraisals together with induction and ongoing training. A member of staff told us, “The manager is always approachable,” and, “The owner asks us if we have any problems and we can email them, but I have not needed to.”

Staff understood the importance of promoting people’s choices and provided the support people required as well as promoting and maintaining their independence. This enabled people to achieve positive outcomes and promoted a good quality of life. One person told us, “I have had some health problems and they understand and they get the GP straight away. That’s reassuring, I get the support I need.”

Staff were caring and knew people, their preferences, likes and dislikes well. We received good feedback from people, relatives and healthcare professionals about the quality of care provided by staff. A visiting healthcare professional commented that they had no concerns about the support people received.

People’s rights, dignity and privacy were respected. People continued to be supported to maintain a balanced diet. Staff monitored nutritional needs and supported people to eat safely and at their own pace.

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. People participated in activities, pursued their interests and maintained relationships with people that mattered to them. One person told us, “I have been down to the local coffee house to have a coffee, you can go out here when you want.”

The service continued to be well led. Effective quality audits remained in place and continuous improvement and learning were embedded in the day to day running of the service. Everyone we spoke with were positive about the registered manager and staff.

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 (Report published on 02 September 2017).

Why we inspected

The inspection was prompted in part due to concerns received about aspects of care planning, risk assessments and staffing. A decision was made for us to inspect and examine those risks as part of a comprehensive inspection.

We found no evidence during this inspection that people were at risk of harm from this concern. Please see the Safe section of this full report.

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.