You are here

Archived: Cotswold Lodge

The provider of this service changed - see new profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 27 September 2011
Date of Publication: 19 October 2011
Inspection Report published 19 October 2011 PDF

People should be treated with respect, involved in discussions about their care and treatment and able to influence how the service is run (outcome 1)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Understand the care, treatment and support choices available to them.
  • Can express their views, so far as they are able to do so, and are involved in making decisions about their care, treatment and support.
  • Have their privacy, dignity and independence respected.
  • Have their views and experiences taken into account in the way the service is provided and delivered.

How this check was done

Our judgement

Staff respect people’s privacy and promote independence. People or their representatives are involved in making choices about how their care and support is given.However; the way in which clothes and some of people’s belongings were stored does not maintain their dignity.

Overall, we found that Cotswold Lodge was meeting this essential standard but, to maintain this, we suggested that some improvements were made.

User experience

We did not speak directly to people about this outcome, but were able to see that they were consulted about their choices that these were respected, and that staff respected their privacy.

Other evidence

The home was fully occupied with eight people living there when we visited, four people were at home and others had gone out for the day to do shopping and to have lunch. During the visit we saw that people were treated respectfully. Staff understood people’s daily routines, and as routine can be very important to people with autism they made sure that these were followed. Routines were clearly recorded in people’s care plans.

People at home spent their time as they chose during the morning, one person chose to get up late, another person said they wanted to watch one of their favourite DVD’s in their room so staff put it on for them, and others spent time with staff or in the lounge. The service catered for people with autism and learning disability, some people were not able to communicate verbally or had a little verbal communication. We saw that staff understood people’s methods of communication and that they responded to non verbal communication such as noises or facial expressions. They made sure that people were settled and attended to if they seemed anxious or were saying they needed something.

Staff respected people’s privacy, people living at the home had keys to their rooms and key holding agreements were in place signed by them or their representatives. The home was introducing new care plans that give clear details about each person’s needs, we could see that people had been involved in the process as far as they were able.

Independence was promoted and people were consulted about the running of the service. People were supported to help with household tasks if as far as possible, such as preparing a drink or cleaning their rooms. Regular residents meetings were held, we read the notes of the last two meetings. People’s comments were recorded exactly as they were said which showed that sometimes there were very lively discussions, the meetings appeared to have been fun and helpful comments had been made. For people who were not able to communicate fully verbally notes were made of their non verbal views. Examples of topics discussed were meals, this year’s holiday, and staff had explained some new pictorial policies, such as about how to complain and keeping safe.

People we saw were acceptably dressed but many of their clothes had been put away in drawers and cupboards looking like they had been screwed up, clothes were unfolded and unironed.Staff told us some people do “rummage” with their clothes, but this did not apply to each person whose clothes were put away in this fashion.

There was a cupboard with named open sections for each person in the entrance hall with items such as shoes and towels in. One section contained incontinence sheets, this section was not named but having the sheets and other items on display was not respectful to people or their dignity.