Flanshaw Lodge

We found the following examples of good practice.

The home had systems in place to support relatives to visit their family members, minimising the risk of infection. There were systems in place to allow safe visits in the home and there was also a designated room to facilitate visits with direct access from outside. Zoom calls had also been facilitated for relatives who were unable to visit, and the registered manager provided regular updates to relatives to ensure communication was maintained.

The registered manager and staff had considered how to prevent social isolation during the pandemic. They had put in place additional activities to ensure peoples well-being.

We observed signage around the home to guide staff on the use of protective personal equipment (PPE).

The premises were clean and hygienic.

COVID-19 tests for staff were being carried out in line with guidance. Staff also had regular lateral flow tests (LFT) to ensure any staff who were not presenting with any symptoms were identified promptly.

Risk assessments were in place to consider and reduce any impact to people who used the service and staff who may be disproportionately at risk of COVID-19. These included Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic groups (BAME), people with learning disabilities and people with dementia.

Flanshaw Lodge is a residential care home that was providing personal care to 22 people living with dementia aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection.

• People were happy living at Flanshaw Lodge.

• Staff were caring and compassionate, and treated people with respect. People were given choices and were supported to make decisions about their daily lives.

• People received personalised care and this was reflected in how well staff knew their individual needs. People were meaningfully engaged in activities appropriate for their interests and needs and staff used everyday opportunities to engage people in conversation.

• Staff were recruited safely and there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Staff training and supervision was regular so staff felt supported in their roles.

• Staff understood individual risks to people and knew the safeguarding processes to follow to ensure people were safe.

• People liked the meals and they enjoyed a variety of food and drinks. People’s health care needs were well managed and they received their medicines when they needed them.

• The home was clean and well maintained, with a refurbishment plan which ensured the premises were in a good state of repair and décor.

• A complaints procedure was displayed. Complaints and concerns were dealt with appropriately.

• The registered manager was committed to providing person centred care and there were regular audits and quality checks to ensure the service ran well.

Rating at last inspection: At the last inspection the service was rated Requires Improvement (report published 8 March 2018). At this inspection, the provider had made sufficient improvements to improve the rating to Good.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection to check this service had improved.

For more details, please see the full report, which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk .

Flanshaw Lodge is a care home for people living with a diagnosis of dementia. There is a registered manager in post who has been running the service for a number of years. 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.

Staff understood how to keep people safe, although not all individual risk assessments were thoroughly completed in people's care records.

Systems and processes were in place for managing medicines although improvements were needed in some areas of recording and auditing.

Accidents and incidents were appropriately recorded, analysed and safeguarded where appropriate.

Staff were suitably trained and supported to carry out their work and they were confident and competent in their role.

There was good support for people's nutrition and hydration and people enjoyed their meals. Staff linked appropriately with other professionals as required and there was effective communication to support people's needs.

Staff had a good rapport with people and engaged in kind and compassionate interaction. Staff responded well to meet people's needs and they involved people in their care and support. People and their relatives said they felt well cared for.

There was a homely and friendly atmosphere in which staff understood people's individual needs well.

Care records required some improvement as there were gaps and a lack of consistency in recording of people’s care and support.

There was very visible leadership through managers’ presence, and clear direction for staff; managers were involved in people's care and knew the needs of the service well. Audits were in place although not always completed effectively to identify areas to improve.

You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

We saw staff were attentive to people's needs.We saw people were well cared for and their individual needs were met in a friendly, homely environment. We saw positive relationships between people and staff, which supported people's well-being, rights and wishes.

People made positive comments such as:

"I have no grumbles"

"What you see is what you get, we're alright here"

"We sing and dance and all sorts"

We found there were enough staff to meet people's needs and to provide care that enhanced their everyday experiences. We were told there were temporary changes to management and we saw the home continued to be well run.

We looked at quality assurance systems and found there were regular audits made to ensure the quality of the service.

We saw records were up to date, well maintained, easily accessible to those who needed them and confidentially filed to ensure people's rights were protected.

We spoke with some of the people who used the service. One person told us 'I like living here.' Another person told us that 'staff look after me.'

We spoke to the cook and they told us that people were able to choose their meals from a menu. One person told us that 'the food is lovely and there is plenty of it.'

We saw that staff received training in safeguarding and there was a corporate safeguarding and whistle blowing policy in place to support staff.

We looked at the care plans of four people who used the service. We saw that they were tailored to meet the needs of the individual. We saw that when a risk had been identified, an action plan had been put into place.

The staff we spoke with told us they enjoyed working in the home. Other staff told us they were able to sit down and 'chit chat' with the people who used the service. We saw that interaction between the staff and the people who used the service was friendly and respectful. One of the people who used the service told us they felt they were 'treated with respect' by the staff.