Chase Lodge Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

At the last inspection, we found safe care and treatment was not always provided because medicines were not safely managed. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.

The registered manager ensured staff understood procedures and expectations to ensure medicines were safely managed. This included regular stock checks and audits, clear written records and information about medicines and the consistent reporting of errors. Although we found an issue which did not meet standards, we saw evidence that this was rectified immediately after our visit and learning was shared with staff.

Safety incidents were reported and investigated, and changes had been made to ensure all staff could report accidents independently. The registered manager had a quality improvement action plan which helped them monitor and review actions and service development.

An increase in permanent staff had led to a reduction in errors and incidents. The registered manager told us they had successfully recruited permanent staff and agency staff had not been used recently. Staffing levels and the skills of staff meant they could safely meet people’s needs.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Safety incidents were reported and investigated, and all staff could report accidents independently. This was a change which had been made since the last inspection.

The provider’s systems and processes supported staff to consistently report issues and accidents. We saw incident forms and logs which were completed in full and reviewed by managers for actions, themes and trends. Improvements were documented and changes were made promptly. The registered manager had a quality improvement action plan which helped them monitor and review actions and service development.

There was evidence that safety events and actions taken were shared with staff to aid learning. Staff meeting minutes, incident forms and emails showed risks and concerns were openly and regularly shared and discussed. This helped to continually identify and embed good practice.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safeguarding during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Involving people to manage risks during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. At the last inspection, we found challenges in recruiting and retaining staff had meant agency staff were used and people did not always receive consistent care which met their needs. The provider had successfully recruited permanent staff and agency staff had not been used recently. This meant people experienced more steady support from a staff team who knew them well.

People were very positive about the care they received from staff. They were pleased the staff team was now more stable and felt they got the support they needed when they wanted it. On the day of our visit, there were enough staff to provide people with the support they needed and there was a calm atmosphere.

Staff rotas showed an appropriate number of staff on each shift to safely meet people’s needs. The registered manager closely monitored staffing levels, and the skill mix to ensure changes could be made if needed. The registered manager acted quickly to manage poor staff performance.

Staff worked together to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. They received training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to deliver safe and effective care, in line with best practice. New staff had a comprehensive induction when they started working for the service and shadowed experienced staff before they worked more independently. There was a good combination of new recruits and staff who had worked at Chase Lodge for many years.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

Since our last inspection, improvements had been made to ensure the management of medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs and preferences.

The registered manager had improved processes to ensure records were clear and complete and medicines were administered as prescribed. Staff now completed stock checks every time medicines were administered, and an audit was carried out each week by the deputy manager. This was overseen by the registered manager who completed an additional audit every month. Shortfalls had been identified through audits and action taken as necessary.

When medication errors occurred, these were reported and responded to appropriately. There was a record of staff signatures to ensure discrepancies could be followed up. We found 2 bottles of liquid medicines which did not have opening dates on them. However, there was evidence there had been a date sticker on the bottles which had been removed or fallen off. This was rectified immediately, and learning was shared with staff.

People were involved in managing their medicines where possible and told us they were happy with the support staff gave them. There was clear and personalised information to support staff with people’s medicines. For example, one person had written guidance about how staff should help them when they needed their EpiPen (injectable medication used to treat severe allergic reactions), and why this was so important.

Improvements had been made to ensure protocols were in place for medicines which people took ‘as required’ (PRN medicines).

Staff received training to be able to administer medicines. This included staff who worked night shifts. The management team ensured staff completed medicines competency checks annually, or more often if required.

Medicines requiring additional security were stored, recorded, administered and disposed of safely. There was effective oversight of their handling, in line with current legislation and guidance.