The Care Quality Commission

Archived: Knightsbridge Lodge

Knightsbridge Green, Knightsbridge, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, GL51 9TA (01242) 680168

Provided and run by:
Mr David Easdown & Mrs Ann Dorothy Easdown

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

All Inspections

8 August 2013

During an inspection in response to concerns

The purpose of this inspection was to follow up on information we had received. The information raised concerns about the care of some people. It included lack of choices for people, people's privacy and dignity not being upheld and concerns about staffing. We spoke with seven people who used the service and two relatives. All seven people said they felt they received good care and they had no complaints. The two relatives also felt their relative received a good standard of care. People told us they were offered choices about their daily lives, for example, where they chose to spend their day, either in their bedroom or in the communal areas and where they ate their meals.

We found that staff had a good knowledge of people's care needs, however people's care plans were not always personalised to their individual choices. Some people did not have care plans or risk assessments in place for all their assessed needs.

When we examined the system they had in place for staff supervision, we found there were limited records of sessions being held with staff. For some staff the last recorded supervision session was in November 2011.

The system they had in place to review and monitor the service people received had limited recorded evidence of audits being carried out. There were limited/or no records to show that the views of people had been obtained and acted upon.

6 March 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We spoke to two people who said "I am very happy here" and "they have looked after me". The service had made improvements in how people were protected when they lacked mental capacity. More robust arrangements were in place to ensure people were protected against abuse. However, concerns correctly reported by a member of staff, in one situation, had not been appropriately followed up by the managers. This potentially compromises these improvements. Improvements had been made to the management of medicines and related records. There were enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff had received additional support to manage some people's needs and further, training and competency checks had been organised. Only two staff out of twenty two had received individual supervision, although these sessions had been planned. Staff had not received an appraisal in the last year, although again, there were plans for these to take place. People's suggestions or requests had been acted on and outcomes for people had improved. Shortfalls/improvements had taken place in response to compliance actions or addressed by the manager as they became aware of issues. There was no organised and recorded monitoring system in place and actions that had been taken had not been recorded. This potentially means that shortfalls may not get addressed before they become a risk and actions taken may be difficult to demonstrate.

12 November 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We saw that, since our last inspection, improvements had been made to the handling of medicines. However appropriate arrangements were not in place for the recording and administration of some medicines. One person we spoke to confirmed that there had been improvements in how medicines were given.

3 October 2012

During a routine inspection

There were 22 people using the service when we carried out this inspection. We spoke to three people who use the service, four members of staff, one visiting community nursing sister, the manager, one of the partners that are the registered provider/owners and two visitors.

People said "it is a wonderful place, they really take care of me" and "staff are lovely and have organised the care I have needed". One visitor said about the staff 'you can't beat them" and another said "staff are very kind and mum is happy here".

The community sister told us the service makes appropriate referrals and follows instructions given by the community nurses.

We could evidence that people's risks were being addressed and their needs were being met. This was despite many shortfalls in record keeping. Staff understood that some people lacked mental capacity and were unable to make decisions for themselves, but they lacked understanding of the legal processes that must be followed in order to protect people.

There were enough staff to meet people's needs but the service lacked a good skill mix. They hoped this would be rectified through the recent recruitment of new staff and by recruiting a head of care.

Arrangements for staff training and development were poor, leaving staff with gaps in their knowledge in key areas of protecting people and meeting their specific needs.

Arrangements for monitoring and assessing the quality of services being provided were extremely poor.

31 July 2012

During an inspection in response to concerns

People who lived at the home were happy with the service looking after their medicines and happy about how their medicines were being administered.

However we found a number of discrepancies which meant that the home could not demonstrate that people were having their medicines administered as prescribed.

The home have been told to look in to these shortfalls and to rectify them. We will follow up the action taken by the home to ensure compliance in this area of care.

Action required for Outcome 21- Records was not reviewed during this Pharmacist's inspection. This will be followed up in the future when a scheduled inspection of the service is carried out.

20 September 2011

During an inspection in response to concerns

People told us they were happy with the care they received and they could make choices about what time they get up each day. People complimented the staff but felt they were very busy at times and they had to wait for their call bells to be answered.

We were told by people that the food they receive is very good and one person said they need a special diet due to their allergies and the cook makes sure they have lots of variety.

Some people had concerns about a member of the management team and we fed this back to the registered provider and manager.