You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 3 February 2017

Marlborough Lodge provides accommodation and support for up to six people who have learning disabilities and complex support needs. The home is a detached property situated in a residential area of St Leonards on Sea. During our inspection there were six people living at the home.

The service was last inspected in August 2014 and was compliant with the standards we inspected. This inspection was unannounced and took place on 12 December 2016.

There was a registered manager responsible for 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.

There were sufficient staff available to enable people to take part in a range of activities according to their interests and preferences. Staff duties were clearly allocated so people received the support they needed.

A safe recruitment procedure was in place and staff received pre-employment checks before starting work with the service.

Staff knew how to recognise and report abuse. They had received training in safeguarding adults from abuse and they knew the procedures to follow if they had concerns.

People lived in a safe environment and were supported by a staff team who had the skills and experience to meet their needs and help to keep people safe.

People received their medicines when they needed them. Staff had received training in the management and administration of medicines and their competency in this area had been reviewed to ensure their practice remained safe.

People’s health care needs were monitored and met. The home made sure people saw the health and social care professionals they needed and they implemented any recommendations made.

Staff had built trusting relationships with people. People were happy with the care they received. Staff interactions with people were positive and caring. Staff morale was good and there was a happy and vibrant atmosphere in the home.

Routines in the home were flexible and were based around the needs and preferences of the people who lived there. People were fully involved in the planning and reviewing of their care.

People were able to plan their day with staff and they were supported to access social and leisure activities in the home and local community. There was an emphasis on enabling people to be as independent as they could be and to live a happy and fulfilling life.

Not all the relatives were aware of the provider’s complaints policy; however they were all confident the registered manager would respond to any concerns.

There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. Staff felt supported by their managers. The provider had not notified us of all significant incidents in line with their legal responsibility.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 3 February 2017

The service was safe.

People received their medicines when they needed them from staff who had received the training to do so.

People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

Risks were identified and managed in ways that enabled people to make choices and participate in activities they enjoyed.

There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff deployed to help keep people safe and meet their individual needs.

Effective

Good

Updated 3 February 2017

The service was effective.

People could see appropriate health care professionals to meet their specific needs.

People made decisions about their day to day lives and were cared for in line with their preferences and choices.

Staff received on-going training to make sure they had the skills and knowledge to provide effective care to people.

Caring

Good

Updated 3 February 2017

The service was caring.

People told us they were supported by caring staff.

People were supported by staff who knew them well.

People were able to make decisions about how they spent their day.

People were supported by staff who understood the importance of privacy and dignity.

Responsive

Good

Updated 3 February 2017

The service was responsive

People received person centred care and support in accordance with their needs and preferences.

People were fully involved in planning and reviewing their care and they were supported to achieve their goals.

People were supported to follow their interests and take part in social activities.

People felt able to raise any concerns with the staff and registered manager.

Well-led

Good

Updated 3 February 2017

The service was well-led.

The service had clear aims and these had been adopted by staff.

The staffing structure gave clear lines of accountability and responsibility and staff received good support.

There were quality assurance programmes in place which monitored the quality and safety of the service provided to people.

We were not always notified of significant incidents relating to people.