You are here

Archived: Ashdown Lodge Good

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 4 March 2016

Ashdown Lodge provides support and accommodation for up to thirteen older people with a variety of long term conditions and physical health needs. Some people were also living with dementia. It is situated in a residential area of Rustington, West Sussex. It is situated in a residential area of Rustington, West Sussex. People had their own room, there was a dining and lounge area which people could spend time in.

The service had a registered manager. 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.

There was an audit schedule for aspects of care such as infection control, accidents and incidents and maintenance of the home. However the monitoring processes were not robust and did not include the areas which we identified at the inspection. The provider told us that they were in the process of compiling a more robust quality assurance system to ensure that issues could be identified and responded to in a timely way.

Policies and procedures were in place to ensure the safe ordering, administration, storage and disposal of medicines. Medicines were managed, stored, given to people as prescribed and disposed of safely.

Consent to care and treatment was not always sought in line with legislation and guidance We reviewed people’s care records and found that there was not a robust process in place to identify when people needed to have a DoL’s application submitted. Within these care records we saw no evidence that capacity assessments had been completed or that people’s abilities to consent to care had been considered.

Risk assessments were in place and reviewed monthly. Where someone was identified as being at risk actions were identified on how to reduce the risk and referrals were made to health professionals as required.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to keep people safe and meet their needs. We observed that people were not left waiting for assistance and people were responded to in a timely way. New staff received an induction to ensure they were competent to start work. Staff had undertaken a comprehensive training programme to ensure that they were able to meet people’s needs however new staff felt that additional dementia awareness training would be beneficial. The registered manager was planning future dates for this training.

People were supported to maintain good health and had access to health professionals. Staff worked in collaboration with professionals such as doctors and the falls prevention team to ensure advice was taken when needed and people’s needs were met. Relatives told us staff responded quickly if people were unwell “if she’s not well they will be straight on the phone to the GP”.

People received enough to eat and drink. People who were at risk were weighed on a monthly basis and referrals or advice was sought where people were identified as being at risk.

Staff knew people well and they were treated in a dignified and respectful way. People told us “the staff are absolutely wonderful” and their relatives told us “it’s absolutely fantastic, it’s not a care home, it’s a caring home”. Another relative told us “for us it’s not just a care home, they look after us as well”.

The care that people received was responsive to their needs. Care plans included information on people’s key relationships, personality and preferences. They also contained information on people’s social and physical needs. People’s care plans contained a document which detailed people’s likes and dislikes. An example was about a person’s preferred morning routine. The document read “(named person) liked to have their breakfast at 7am and likes to remain in bed until just after 10am, they prefer a blanket rather than a duvet. They like to have their coffee in the lounge at 10.30am”.

There was a weekly schedule of activities for people to take part in which included reminiscence games, bingo and a quiz and this was made available for people to read and chose what activities they would like to take part in.

The registered manager told us there vision was to create a homely atmosphere which provided quality care to people. Staff shared this vision and told us “it’s just like a little guest house, everybody has good words to say about Ashdown”. We were also told “we’re like one big family, it’s really important as it’s their home at the end of the day”.

We found one breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 4 March 2016

The service was safe.

Safe recruitment practices were followed however at times staff started before their Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks were completed. The provider agreed that they would now ensure that any new staff started once their DBS certificate had been received.

There were sufficient numbers of staff to make sure that people were safe and their needs were met

Medicines were managed safely however the temperature of the storage of medicines was not being monitored and recorded.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 4 March 2016

The service was not always effective.

People’s rights were not always protected as the provider did not have clear processes in place for assessing people’s capacity to consent to their care and treatment and take action where a Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) application may be required.

People were supported to maintain good health and had regular contact with health care professionals.

Staff received the training they required however newer staff felt additional dementia training would be beneficial

Caring

Good

Updated 4 March 2016

The service was caring.

Staff were kind, caring and offered reassurance to people when needed.

People were treated in a dignified and respectful way

People and those that mattered to them were involved in their care

Responsive

Good

Updated 4 March 2016

The service was responsive

People received care which was personalised and responsive to their needs however people with behaviour which may challenge did not always have care plans on how to support with this.

Complaints were dealt with promptly and in an informal way.

There were structured and meaningful activities for people to take part in

Well-led

Good

Updated 4 March 2016

The service was well led.

Some quality assurance systems were in a place however the provider was undertaking further improvements in this area to enable continuous improvement

People and their relatives were positive about the quality of care delivered.

Staff felt able to discuss any concerns with the registered manager.