Archived: Belvoir Lodge

Updated 29 October 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.

We inspected the service on 4 October 2016. The inspection 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 care service.

Prior to our inspection we reviewed information we held about the service. This included previous inspection reports, information received and statutory notifications. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law. We sought feedback from health and social care professionals who have been involved in the service and commissioners who fund the care for some people who use the service. Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

People who used the service had limited verbal communication and so we relied on observations and spoke with the relatives of two people to get their views. We spoke with four members of support staff, the service manager and the registered manager. The service manager was responsible for the day to day running of the service and was overseen by the registered manager who did not work daily in the service. We looked at the care records of two people who used the service, medicines records of five people, staff training records, as well as a range of records relating to the running of the service including audits carried out by the service manager and registered manager.

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.

Updated 29 October 2016

We inspected the service on 4 October 2016. The inspection was unannounced. Belvoir Lodge provides accommodation to five younger adults with learning and physical disabilities. The service is open plan to accommodate people who use wheelchairs. There is an overhead tracking system for the hoist, so that people can move around the service. On the day of our inspection five people were using the service.

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on At the last inspection on , 29 September 2015 we asked the provider to take action to make improvements to the way they monitored the quality of the service, and this action had been partially completed.

The service had a registered manager in place at the time of our inspection. 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.

People were supported by staff who knew how to recognise abuse and how to respond to concerns. Risks in relation to people’s daily life were assessed and planned for to protect them from harm.

People were supported by enough staff to ensure they received care and support when they needed it. Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines as prescribed.

People were supported by staff who had the knowledge and skills to provide safe and appropriate care and support. People were supported to make decisions and staff knew how to act if people did not have the capacity to make decisions.

People were supported to maintain their nutrition and staff were monitoring and responding to people’s health conditions. People lived in a service where staff knew them and their preferences listened to them. People’s emotional needs were recognised and responded to by a staff team who cared about the individual they were supporting. People were supported to enjoy a social life. Concerns were responded to appropriately.

Systems in place to monitor the quality of the service were not always effective. People were involved in giving their views on how the service was run and there was an open and inclusive culture.