Archived: Haven Lodge

Updated 5 May 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

At the last inspection on 8 July 2014, we found there were not always sufficient staff to meet people’s needs and there was a lack of meaningful activities for people to participate in.

This inspection took place on 3 and 7 March 2016 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of two inspectors and an expert-by-experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of service.

Before the inspection, we looked at the evidence we already held about this service. This included the last inspection report and notifications the provider had sent us.

During the inspection, we spoke with the registered manager, the cook, a senior carer, two carers, the activities co-ordinator, seven people who used the service and four relatives. We reviewed four care records, four staff files and records relating to the management of the service, including menus, medicines, staff training and quality assurance. We observed care and support in communal areas and 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 to us.

Updated 5 May 2016

Haven Lodge is a care home that provides residential care for older people and people living with dementia. It is registered for 15 people and at the time of this inspection there were 12 people using the service.

There was a registered manager at the service. 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.

At the last inspection, we found there were not enough staff and people did not have enough activities. However at this inspection, there were enough staff working to meet people’s needs and the provider had employed a second activities co-ordinator.

Staff knew how to report concerns or abuse. Risk assessments were carried out and management plans put in place to enable people to receive safe care. There were effective and up to date systems in place to check and maintain the safety of the premises. Recruitment checks were carried out for new staff to ensure they were safe to work with people. The provider had systems in place to ensure the safe management and administration of medicines.

Staff received support through regular supervisions and had opportunities for training and skill development. The registered manager was knowledgeable about the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and appropriate applications for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards had been applied for and authorised. People had access to healthcare professionals as required to meet their day-to-day needs.

People were offered a choice of nutritious food and drink. Staff knew the people they were supporting including their preferences to ensure a personalised service was provided. People and their relatives thought staff and the registered manager were caring. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and enabled people to maintain their independence. The service had documented details of people’s preferences of funeral plan arrangements. People and their relatives knew how to make a complaint.

The provider held regular meetings for staff and for people and their families. People and their relatives were able to give feedback through satisfaction surveys. Staff, people and relatives told us the registered manager was supportive. The provider had quality assurance systems in place to identify areas for improvement.