You are here

Archived: Halford Lodge Good

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 13 April 2016

We undertook an announced visit to Halford Lodge on 16 and 17 March 2016. We told the provider before our visit that we would be coming. This was so people could give consent for us to visit them in their flats to talk with them.

Halford Lodge provides housing with care. People live in their own home and receive personal care and support from staff at pre-arranged times and in emergencies. At the time of our visit 17 people at Halford Lodge received personal care. The provider had informed us the service was due to close by September 2017, staff and people who used the service had been informed of this decision.

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 were processes to minimise risks to people’s safety. Staff knew what actions to take to keep people safe and there were procedures to manage identified risks with people’s care. There was a procedure for managing people’s medicines safely.

The registered manager understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) to ensure people were looked after in a way that did not inappropriately restrict their freedom. This included applications to the relevant authority for any restrictions to people's freedom that were deemed as necessary to keep them safe; known as Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People received care from familiar staff who knew them well. People told us staff were caring and had the right skills and experience to provide the care and support they required.

There were enough staff to deliver the care and support people required. Checks were carried out prior to staff starting work to ensure their suitability to work with people who lived at Halford Lodge. Staff received an induction when they started working for the service and completed training to support them in meeting people’s needs effectively.

Care plans were regularly reviewed and contained relevant information for staff to help them provide the personalised care people required. People knew how to complain and information about making a complaint was available for people.

There was a stable management team. Staff told us management were approachable and supportive. People and staff felt confident they could raise any concerns or issues with the managers and that these would be listened to and acted on.

There were processes to monitor the quality of the service provided, and to understand the experiences of people who used the service. This was through regular communication with people and staff and returned surveys. There was a programme of other checks and audits by the provider and the management team to ensure the quality of the service was maintained.

Inspection areas



Updated 13 April 2016

The service was safe.

Staff knew what to do to keep people safe and understood their responsibility to report any concerns or suspected abuse. There were procedures to protect people from risk of harm and staff understood the risks relating to people’s care. Staff had been recruited safely and there were sufficient staff to provide the support people required. People’s medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines as prescribed.



Updated 13 April 2016

The service was effective.

Staff were trained and supervised to ensure they had the right skills and knowledge to support people effectively. The managers understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and staff respected decisions people made about their care. People who required support with their nutritional needs had enough to eat and drink during the day and people had access to healthcare services.



Updated 13 April 2016

The service was caring.

People said they were supported by caring staff that they knew well. Staff ensured they respected people’s privacy and dignity, and people were able to maintain their independence. People were involved in decisions about their care and where possible lived their lives as they chose.



Updated 13 April 2016

The service was responsive.

People’s care needs were assessed and people received a service that was based on their personal preferences. Support plans were regularly reviewed and staff were kept up to date about changes in people’s care. People knew how to make a complaint and were given opportunities to share their views about the service



Updated 13 April 2016

The service was well-led.

People were satisfied with the service they received. There was a consistent management team that regularly reviewed the quality of service provided. People and staff considered the management team to be approachable and responsive. Staff received the support and supervision required to carry out their work safely and effectively.