We carried out a review of the data available to us about Navara Lodge on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Navara Lodge, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
People had been supported to keep in touch with their families throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Staff provided support where necessary so that people could phone or video call their families. Letters and cards were also sent to families and friends. Visitors to the service used a outside area or room in the home which had its own designated access to manage the flow of visitors. The expectations and procedures for visitors to the service were clear. Visitors were asked to enter the home from the back of the property where they were provided with guidance, personal protective equipment (PPE) and health screening was completed. Each visitor also had their temperature checked by staff on arrival.
The provider had developed policies and procedures in response to the coronavirus pandemic. These policies had been adapted to reflect the changes throughout the last 12 months. The guidance and information for staff was clear with detailed safe systems of work for the home.
The registered manager understood the requirements to ensure correct infection control standards and protocols were in place. At the time of the inspection there were no visible signs or concerns regarding infection control or the cleanliness of the home.
Mechanisms were in place to support of staff, and risk assessments had been completed with staff or people who used the service who were identified as facing higher risks from COVID-19. Staff were regularly tested for COVID-19 and had received COVID-19 vaccinations. Staff who were unable to receive the vaccination had a risk assessment to ensure any further risk of spreading the virus was mitigated.
People were supported in a person centred way, when implementing the changes and procedures required to minimise the risk of COVID 19 in the home. We heard of examples of how individuals had been supported with real compassion and understanding when they had become distressed during this time.
Navara Lodge is a care home which is registered to provide care (without nursing) for up to eighteen older people. The home is a large detached building situated on the outskirts of Reading. There were seventeen people living in the home at the time of the inspection.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
People’s experience of using this service:
People’s safety was upheld by staff who had been trained in safeguarding vulnerable adults and health and safety policies and procedures.
There were enough staff on duty at all times to meet people’s diverse, individual needs safely and effectively.
Staff were well-trained and able to meet people’s health and well-being needs.
People were happy living at the service. People were observed smiling and positively interacting with the staff supporting them.
People were encouraged to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.
The committed, attentive and knowledgeable staff team provided care with kindness and respect. Relatives were particularly complementary about the standard of care provided. Individualised care planning ensured people’s equality and diversity was fully respected.
The provider/registered manager was well regarded and respected. Staff felt the management was supportive and approachable. Staff were happy in their role which had a positive effect on people's wellbeing. The quality of care the service provided continued to be reviewed and improved, as necessary.
Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection the service was rated Good (report published 10 September 2016).
Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on previous rating.
Follow up:
We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.
Navara Lodge is registered to provide care (without nursing) for up to 18 older people. There were 18 people resident on the day of the visit. The building offers accommodation over two floors in 16 single and one double room. The double room has full length privacy curtains and individual washing facilities. The second floor is accessed via a staircase or lift. The shared areas within the service met the needs and wishes of people who live in the home.
The service has a registered manager, who was also one of the providers, running 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.
The management team, generally, kept people, visitors to the service and staff safe. However, the service needed to risk assess radiators and record hot water temperatures. Most risks were identified and managed to make sure people and others were kept as safe as possible. Staff were provided with training in the safeguarding of vulnerable adults and health and safety. Staff were able to describe how they kept people safe from all forms of abuse.
People were provided with safe care because there were adequate numbers of appropriately skilled staff available. The service’s recruitment procedure ensured that as far as possible, all staff employed were suitable and safe to work with vulnerable people. People were given their medicines in the right amounts at the right times by staff who had been trained to carry out this task.
The management team and staff protected people’s rights to make their own decisions and consent to their care. The staff team understood the relevance of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and consent issues which related to the people in their care. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 legislation provides a legal framework that sets out how to act to support people who do not have capacity to make a specific decision. People in the home had the capacity to make their own decisions and choices and no one was deprived of their liberty.
People’s health and well- being needs were met by staff who were properly trained and supported to do so. People were assisted to make sure they received health and well-being care from appropriate professionals. Staff were trained in necessary areas so they could effectively meet people’s diverse and changing needs.
People and staff built strong relationships and staff provided caring and compassionate support. Staff encouraged people to make as many decisions and choices as they could to enable them to keep as much control of their daily lives, as was possible. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect at all times. The service had a strong culture of person centred care which recognised that people were individuals with their own needs and preferences
People benefitted from a very well-managed service. The registered manager was described as very approachable. The registered manager worked directly with people and was very knowledgeable about their individual needs. The service made sure they maintained and improved the quality of care provided.
People were supported to be able to eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs. We saw that people had their fluid and food intake monitored by the staff and that any concerns were acted upon. We saw that people who required support with feeding and drinking were provided with this in an unhurried, assured manner. Throughout our inspection we saw that people had access to cold drinks and were provided with tea and coffee whenever they asked.
We observed that people had their medicines at the correct times, in a safe and reassuring way.
We found that people had been protected from the harm and the risk of unsafe equipment. This was because the provider had ensured equipment was suitable for its purpose, properly maintained and had been used correctly by suitably trained staff.
Staff had been subjected to a robust recruitment process to ensure that they were honest, trustworthy and appropriately qualified to meet the needs of the people they supported.
There was an effective complaints system, although there had been no formal complaints since the last inspection. People told us that they knew how to complain but said they had no reason to.
People who use the service told us that the staff were always kind and helpful. One person said, 'The staff are so caring, so, so, caring and they always come so quickly'. Another person said, 'It's really good here. When I first came here I couldn't walk at all. Now I'm going up the stairs on my own like a spring chicken'.
We were invited to look in several rooms by people who were clearly proud of them. We found these were well decorated and spacious, with heating, lighting and ventilation that conformed to the recognised standards.
Staff said their training and support was good. Staff told us that they were encouraged to broaden their skills and supported by the manager if they wished to complete specialised training.
People who lived in the home told us that they were able to report concerns and talk to the staff about any issues that worried them. They told us that they enjoyed the residents meetings where they were able to share their views. The provider took account of complaints and comments to improve the service.
We saw that records were used to plan appropriate care to ensure people's rights and best interests were protected.
They told us they were involved in the decisions made about their care. They told us they were involved in the review of their care plan and that changes were made only if they were in agreement. Some people told us that although they had agreed to the care they were to receive, they had not seen their care plan to sign it in agreement.
People who use the service told us that they had no concerns or worries about the care they received. They said that they were kept fully informed and could approach staff if they were worried or concerned.