We carried out a review of the data available to us about Furzeham Lodge Care Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Furzeham Lodge Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Furzeham Lodge is a residential care home that provides accommodation and support for up to 22 older people, some of whom may be living with dementia or physical frailty. At the time of the inspection there were 19 people living at the service.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were treated with kindness, compassion and relatives had confidence in the registered manager and told us the service was well managed.
People's needs, and choices were assessed, and their care and support delivered to achieve effective outcomes. Care plans provided staff with information and guidance about how to meet people's needs in the way they preferred.
Risks associated with people’s care needs and the environment had been appropriately assessed and staff had been provided with information on how to support people safely. We have made a recommendation about window restriction.
People were protected from potential abuse by staff who had received training and were confident in raising concerns. There was a thorough recruitment process in place that checked potential staff were safe to work with people who may be vulnerable.
People’s medicines were managed safely and stored securely.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
We were assured the service were following safe infection prevention and control procedures to keep people safe. The service had ongoing monitoring arrangements to ensure all aspects of infection control followed best practice guidance.
The provider had systems and procedures to monitor and assess the quality and safety of the home. The registered manager had increased their level of oversight and lessons had been learnt from past inspections. Relatives, staff and healthcare professionals had confidence in the registered manager and told us the service was well led.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update
The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 3 April 2019) and there were breaches of regulation. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating. We undertook this focused inspection to check they had followed their action plan and to confirm they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to the Key Questions Safe and Well-led which contain those requirements.
The ratings from the previous comprehensive inspection for those key questions not looked at on this occasion were used in calculating the overall rating at this inspection. The overall rating for the service has changed from requires improvement to good. This is based on the findings at this inspection.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Furzeham Lodge Care Home on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
People’s experience of using this service: People were happy living at Furzeham Lodge and told us they felt safe and well cared for. Staff were seen to be kind, caring and it was clear staff knew people and their relatives well.
People were not always protected from the risk of avoidable harm. We found risks such as those associated with medicines had not been managed safely.
We found staff were using people’s bedrooms to take their allocated breaks. The registered manager took immediate action to stop this practice.
People were not always supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and whilst we did not find that people were being disadvantaged, we have recommended the provider reviews all documentation in relation to the management of people’s finances.
Other risks to people were being assessed and management plans were in place to ensure risks were mitigated as much as possible and staff were aware of their responsibilities to safeguard people.
There were sufficient numbers of staff employed to ensure people’s needs were met. Staff had time to sit and engage people in conversation and to support people’s involvement in social activities. Recruitment practices were safe and staff were well-trained.
The home was clean, well maintained and people were protected from the risk and/or spread of infection as staff had access to personal protective equipment (PPE).
People and their relatives were involved in making decisions about their care. The registered managers worked in partnership with health and social care professionals. The provider had systems in place to review, monitor and improve the quality of service provided, but these did not always identify shortfalls.
We have made a recommendation in relation to systems in place to monitor, the quality and safety of the services provided.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection: The home was previously rated as Good. The report was published on 1st September 2016.
Why we inspected: This was a planned comprehensive inspection that was scheduled to take place in line with Care Quality Commission scheduling guidelines for adult social care services.
Enforcement: We found breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. We have also made recommendations in relation to mental capacity and quality assurance systems. Please see the ‘action we have told the provider to take’ section towards the end of the report.
Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the home until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.
The home 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.
At the time of the inspection there were 20 people living at the service. Some of these people were living with Dementia. During our inspection we observed a calm and relaxed atmosphere in the home. Staff interacted with people in a friendly and respectful way.
People told us they felt safe and well cared for and people praised the atmosphere of the home. Staff, people and Health Care Professionals (HCP) said they were happy with the care being provided at the home. Staff were knowledgeable about the people they were caring for. .Each person had a care plan detailing their care needs. Staff delivered care to people that met their individual personal needs. They fully involved their families if this was appropriate. Staff consistently demonstrated affection and warmth in their relationships with people. People praised the standard and the cleanliness of the home.
Recruitment systems were in place; new employees underwent the relevant pre-employment checks before starting work. Care staff had completed an application form and the registered manager carried out robust checks when they employed staff. There was a good system in place for ordering, storing and returning medicines; We found systems were in place to make sure people received their medicines safely.
People, staff and health care professionals told us they were happy with the care being provided at the home. People’s needs had been assessed prior to them moving into the home. Each person had a care plan which had been developed with them and their relatives. These care plans contained information about each person’s needs and how staff should meet these. Care staff spoke confidently about people’s individual care needs and how they met these.
Staff knew how to recognise and report the signs of abuse and had received training in safeguarding people. They were confident about how to raise concerns if they were concerned about anyone.
The registered manager and staff demonstrated an understanding of their responsibilities in relation to the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005. Where people lacked capacity, mental capacity assessments had been completed and best interest decisions made in line with the MCA. At the time of the inspection, a number of applications had been made to the local authority in relation to people living at the service. This meant people’s legal rights were protected.
There were systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. Checks and audits were undertaken to make sure full and safe procedures were adhered to. People and relatives had been asked their opinion of the quality of the service –and were invited to attend regular meetings with the registered manager.
People told us they enjoyed the food and that there was plenty of it. Meals were appetising and people were offered choice.
We saw that staff were respectful and caring towards the people who lived at the home. People were treated with dignity and compassion.
We noted that staff gave people time to make decisions and questions were asked in an appropriate way for the person to understand. Staff gave eye contact and positioned themselves so that the person they were speaking to could see their face and their expression.
We looked at staff files and found that the recruitment process was standardised, that details of applicants qualifications and experience were documented and checked and that DBS checks and two references were present for each staff member. This showed us that the people are cared for by staff who are properly qualified and able to do their job and that staff are appropriately checked to ensure the safety of the people who live at the home.
The service had a nice friendly atmosphere. It was warm and inviting and we saw people laughing and enjoying each others company. I lovely smell of home cooking filled the air.
Following the inspection the home sent us an action plan telling us how they intended to improve this.
On this visit we found the home had taken positive action to improve the recording of people's involvement in their care planning. We also found that they had provided new systems for the recording of people's capacity to make decisions. Records had also been provided to support families and individuals in making decisions in relation to their end of life care, including the levels of treatment they would like at that time. This information was being shared with supporting medical services to ensure that all parties involved with the individuals care were clear about their wishes.
We saw that staff interacted well with individuals, and were clear about anticipating their needs. Relatives we spoke with told us that staff were responsive to individuals, and that the home was very good. One person told us "it's a very homely place. Carol (the manager) is a great strength and drives the place forward". Another relative told us that their relative was looked after well and that they had no concerns about their care.
One person living at the home told us that the staff were very good and looked after them. They told us they enjoyed spending time in their room as they had a view of the sea and there was always something different to watch.
We looked at five plans for people. The care plans we saw were comprehensive and included the strengths of the individual including personality traits and characteristics. This demonstrated a respect for the individual. However one plan we saw contained a non resuscitation form which had not been completed in accordance with the Mental Capacity Act, and did not protect people.