Archived: Faringdon Lodge

Updated 24 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. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

Faringdon Lodge 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 and took place over two days on 24 and 26 July 2019.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report. We also looked at notifications we received from the service. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with seven people who used the service and four relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with six members of staff including the nominated individual, registered manager, deputy manager, two care workers and a housekeeping member of staff. The nominated individual is responsible for supervising the management of the service on behalf of the provider. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We reviewed a range of records. This included seven people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at five staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including policies and procedures were reviewed.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found.

Updated 24 September 2019

About the service:

Faringdon Lodge is a residential care home registered to provide personal care, support and accommodation for up to 28 people in one adapted building across two separate wings, each of which have separate adapted facilities. At the time of our inspection the care home accommodated 23 people, many of whom had dementia.

People’s experience of using this service:

We have found several concerns about the service. Staff understood how to identify abuse but they did not always follow procedures to report them. Medicines were administered safely but not always stored correctly. There were times that the service was short staffed. People’s care plans were not followed with regards to their bathing preferences. Staff inductions were not always recorded. The provider’s quality assurance systems were not always effective.

We have made one recommendation in the report about record keeping with regards to people’s capacity.

Risks to people were recorded. There were infection control measures in place.

People told us staff were experienced and knew how to do their jobs. Staff received training and supervision. People were supported to have maximum choice and control in their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were supported with their healthcare needs and the service worked with other agencies to the benefit of people. People’s needs were assessed. People enjoyed the food they were provided and were supported to eat and drink healthily.

People and their relatives told us they were treated well. Staff understood equality and diversity. People could express their views and be involved with choices around their care and treatment. People told us their privacy and dignity were respected and their independence promoted.

There were mixed views on the activities the service provided. People’s needs were recorded in their care plans and staff understood these needs. The service made information accessible to people with communication needs. People were able to make complaints and when doing so these were responded to appropriately by the service. The service was working with the local authority to make improvements to how they provided end of life care.

People told us they thought highly of the management team. The registered manager was responsive and wanted to improve the service to the benefit of people who lived there. People held meetings and were engaged with the service. People and relatives were able to complete surveys to assist with improving the service. The service completed audits to monitor the safety and care of people using the service.

Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection the service was rated Good (report published on 7 March 2018)

Why we inspected: The inspection was prompted in part due to concerns received about short staffing and record keeping. A decision was made for us to inspect and examine those risks.

We have found evidence that the provider needs to make improvements. Please see the Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-Led sections of this full report.

Enforcement:

We have identified breaches in relation to incidents not being reported, short staffing, people not being bathed as per their care planned wishes and the service’s quality assurance systems at this inspection.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Follow up: We will request an action plan for the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.