You are here

Archived: Southmoor Lodge Care Home

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 7 December 2012
Date of Publication: 9 January 2013
Inspection Report published 9 January 2013 PDF | 80.82 KB

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

We reviewed all the information we have gathered about Southmoor Lodge Care Home, looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 7 December 2012 and observed how people were being cared for. We talked with people who use the service, talked with carers and / or family members and talked with staff.

Our judgement

People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected. People’s views and experiences were taken into account in the way the service was provided and delivered in relation to their care.

Reasons for our judgement

At our previous inspection of Southmoor Lodge we identified concerns that people had not been involved in making choices and decisions with regard to their care and asked the provider to take action to return to address the issue. At our latest inspection we looked at the care files of three people and saw that they contained information that was individual to that person and that they, or their representative where appropriate had signed to show they had been involved in the process. We saw that people's capacity to make decisions had been addressed and best interest documentation was in place. There was clear evidence of the involvement of relatives and healthcare professionals in decisions relating to people's care. This showed people expressed their views and were involved in making decisions about their care and treatment.

We saw the activities coordinator leading a group of people in gentle seated exercise. There was a vibrant atmosphere and good humoured banter. We saw that other people were seated in a quiet area and others had chosen to spend time in their room. With consent we looked at the rooms of some people living at Southmoor Lodge and saw they were spacious, warm and well decorated. They had been personalised with people's own furniture and belongings, where they had chosen to do so.

One member of staff told us, “Breakfast can go on until 10.30 on some days. It depends what they want. It's their home after all." We saw that some people were planning to go to the local public house to enjoy a Christmas dinner, supported by staff.

This showed that people were supported in promoting their independence and community involvement.

We saw that the reception area contained information clearly displayed that related to people's care and welfare. This included advice on infection control, hygiene and the complaints procedure. We also saw a large, easy read board that showed all of the activities planned for the month.

We saw that information was available to people regarding the home and the services it provided to assist them in reaching an informed choice before moving to the home. This showed that people who used the service were given appropriate information and support regarding their care.

We saw that people's clothing was clean and they were dressed appropriately in clothes of their choice.

At lunch time we saw people being offered a choice of food and saw those who required support to eat being gently assisted. We saw staff supporting people in the way they wanted, being respectful and calling people by their preferred name. For example two people wished to be addressed formally as Mr and Miss.

This showed that people's diversity, values and human rights were respected