You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 6 November 2019

About the service

The Lodge is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to 2 people with learning disabilities and autism at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 4 people in one adapted building.

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

The service was a small home. There were deliberately no identifying signs, intercom, cameras, industrial bins or anything else outside to indicate it was a care home. Staff were also discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

Audits were not always effective to check the quality of the service. Some audit checks did not identify inconsistencies in documentation.

Systems in place ensured people were kept safe. Staff understood how to protect people from abuse. Risks were assessed and reviewed effectively and staff understood how to manage risk to people. People were supported by a sufficient number of safely recruited staff who were flexible to meet people’s needs. Medicines were stored and administered safely and as required medicines were used appropriately as a last resort. People lived in a clean and tidy environment and staff understood how to promote infection control. Lessons were learned when things went wrong and action was taken to reduce the risk of reoccurrence.

People’s needs and choices were holistically assessed and considered people’s needs related to equality and diversity. Care was delivered in line with people’s needs and choices. People were supported by staff who were appropriately trained and had the skills to meet their needs. People were supported to eat in line with their care plans and dietician advice. People were referred to healthcare professionals in a timely manner when needed. People lived in an environment that had been adapted to meet their personalised needs.

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.

People were supported by kind and caring staff who treated them with empathy. People were supported to make decisions for themselves where possible. People were supported by staff who respected their privacy and dignity. People were encouraged to be independent.

People were involved in care planning and reviewing their needs to ensure they had as much control as possible over their care. People were supported by staff who knew how to meet their personalised needs. People were supported by staff who understood their communication needs and systems were in place to ensure compliance with the Accessible Information Standard. People were encouraged to engage in personalised activities of their choice and staff promoted family relationships. A complaints policy was in place and relatives were encouraged to use this when needed. People’s end of life wishes were considered.

The registered manager was aware of their statutory responsibilities and submitted notifications to CQC where required. A person centred approach to care was encouraged and staff followed this to promote good outcomes for people. Staff and relatives found the registered manager to be approachable and were confident they would address any concerns. The provider encouraged an open environment in line with the duty of candour. Staff and

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 6 November 2019

The service was safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.

Effective

Good

Updated 6 November 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.

Caring

Good

Updated 6 November 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.

Responsive

Good

Updated 6 November 2019

The service was responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.

Well-led

Requires improvement

Updated 6 November 2019

The service was not always well led.

Details are in our well led findings below.