You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 20 October 2018

This inspection took place on 21 and 28 August 2018 and was unannounced.

Lindum House provides both nursing and personal care for those who may have dementia or a physical disability. It is registered for 64 people. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. The Care Quality Commission (CQC) regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. At the time of our inspection 55 people were receiving a service.

At our last inspection in July 2017, we rated the service requires improvement. At that inspection, we found that the building was not dementia friendly. We recommended the service seek advice and guidance from a reputable source about use of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. During this inspection we have found that the provider has met these requirements.

The service had a manager in place who was registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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.

Medicines were managed safely and staff had a good knowledge of the medicine systems and procedures in place to support this. We found staff had been recruited safely and training was provided to meet the needs of people. Staff received regular supervision and appraisal and told us they felt supported in their roles. There was sufficient staff in place to meet people's needs.

Staff received training on safeguarding adults from abuse and understood their responsibilities in respect of protecting people from the risk of harm. Accidents and incidents were responded to appropriately and monitored by the management team. The service was clean and infection control measures were in place. People and relatives spoke positively about the clean and well-appointed environment.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Care plans reflected people's current needs and were person-centred.

People’s nutrition and hydration needs were catered for. A choice of meals was offered and drinks and snacks were made readily available throughout the day.

There was a positive caring culture within the service and we observed people were treated with dignity and respect. People’s wider support needs were catered for through the provision of activities provided by an activity coordinator, volunteers and visiting entertainers.

There was a complaints policy and procedure which was available to people who received a service and their relatives. All complaints were acknowledged and responded to quickly and efficiently. The service sought feedback from people who received a service; feedback was positive.

There was a range of quality audits in place completed by the management team. These were up-to-date and completed on a regular basis. All the people we spoke with told us they felt the service was well-led; they felt listened to and could approach management with concerns. Staff told us they enjoyed working at the service and enjoyed their jobs. People spoke highly of the provider and they felt proud to work at the service. The service had built positive relationships with visiting professionals.

Inspection areas



Updated 20 October 2018

The service was safe.

People told us they felt safe living at the service.

People received safe support with their medicines.

People had risk assessments in place to guide staff in providing safe support.

Environmental checks had been undertaken regularly to help ensure the premises were safe.

There was sufficient staff available to meet people's needs.



Updated 20 October 2018

The service was effective.

People�s rights were protected under the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People were supported to meet their nutritional needs.

People received effective support from staff that had the skills and knowledge to meet their needs.



Updated 20 October 2018

The service was caring.

People and their relatives spoke positively about the staff who provided care.

Staff were observed to be kind and caring in their approach.

People�s privacy and dignity was respected at all times.

People were encouraged to remain independent.



Updated 20 October 2018

The service was responsive.

People had access to a range of activities suited to their needs and interests.

Care plans were person centred and covered a range of people�s needs.

There was a complaints procedure in place and people felt confident about raising complaints.



Updated 20 October 2018

The service was well-led.

There was a comprehensive system of audits in place to monitor the quality of service provided.

People were consulted and involved in the running of the service.

There was a registered manager in post who was supported by the wider organisation.