You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 5 August 2015

This inspection took place on 3 June 2015 and was unannounced. The service met the requirements of the regulations during the previous inspection which took place on 30 January 2014.

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.

Elwin Lodge Care Home is a small care home for two people with learning disabilities. It is located in Tooting, South-West London. It is close to local amenities and has good transport links. It is one of three homes owned by Mark A Peake.

People using the service live in separate flats in the home, both with their own bedroom, bathroom, kitchen and lounge.

People were treated with kindness and respect and were able to take part in activities both in the home and out in the community.

Effective methods were used to communicate with people using the service, who were not able to communicate verbally. Care plans identified the most appropriate techniques to communicate with them, for example the use of a communication book or by using objects of reference. Staff were familiar with these methods. We observed staff communicating with people and they did so confidently and in an engaging manner. We saw that people responded to them in a positive manner.

Where people did not have the capacity to consent to certain decisions related to their care, the service followed guidance in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Decisions were taken in people’s best interests after consultations with professionals involved in their care. Where it was deemed that people required restrictions on their liberty to keep them safe, authorisation was sought from the local authority which helped to ensure people’s rights were protected.

There was evidence that people’s behaviours were managed effectively by the service. Support guidelines were in place to support staff when people displayed behaviour that challenged the service. Staff were familiar with these techniques. The service worked closely with psychologists and psychiatrists to understand the reason for these behaviour patterns and care plans were produced to minimise behaviour that challenged from occurring in future.

People’s needs in terms of their medicines and their diet were met by the service. People told us they were able to see healthcare professionals such as their GP or consultant psychiatrist if they needed.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and they displayed an excellent understanding of the best way to support people with respect to all aspects of their lives. They demonstrated an excellent understanding of people’s medical and nutritional support needs. They received regular supervision and told us they were given responsibility as key workers for people.

Care plans and risk assessments were reviewed regularly to ensure they were still relevant to people. Audits, for example medicines, financial and health and safety were carried out as a means of quality assurance.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 5 August 2015

The service was safe. Healthcare professionals who we contacted and records that we saw gave us no cause for concern in relation to people’s safety. Staff had attended safeguarding training and were able to identify potential signs of abuse.

There were enough staff to meet the needs of people. Where needed people were supported to go out during the day by staff.

Medicines were managed appropriately and staff demonstrated a good understanding of medicines management at the service.

Risk assessments for people were reviewed regularly and identified actions that staff needed to take to manage the risk.

Effective

Good

Updated 5 August 2015

The service was effective. Staff displayed an excellent understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Best interests meetings were held where people did not have the capacity to make informed decisions and where people were restricted in some way to keep them safe, the provider acted in line with the MCA.

Staff received regular training and ongoing support in gaining relevant qualifications. They told us they felt valued within the organisation.

People’s ongoing healthcare needs were met by the provider and referrals made to the appropriate healthcare professionals to manage more complex needs. Excellent relationships had been established with community professionals.

People’s nutritional needs were met by the service.

Caring

Good

Updated 5 August 2015

The service was caring. We observed friendly interaction between staff and people using the service

Care plans were person centred and looked at people’s emotional wellbeing.

Staff were familiar with people’s preferences in all aspects of their lives and their privacy and dignity were respected.

Responsive

Good

Updated 5 August 2015

The service was responsive. People’s needs were assessed and care plans were reviewed regularly and were comprehensive in their scope. The service was responsive to the changing needs of people.

People were able to access activities of their choice.

There had been no formal complaints about the service from people, relatives or professionals.

Well-led

Good

Updated 5 August 2015

The service was well-led. Staff told us the registered manager was approachable and listened to them.

Health and social care professionals who we contacted told us they worked well with staff and said the service was managed well.

Quality monitoring checks, for example on medicines, financial records and environmental safety were completed.