You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 12 January 2018

The inspection took place on the 17 October 2017 and was unannounced. The inspection continued on the 18 October 2017 and was announced. Belmore Lodge is a residential nursing home in Lymington and registered to provide accommodation for up to 55 people. There were 52 people using the service on the days of our inspection. Rooms are over three floors, single occupancy and all have an ensuite with a wash basin and toilet. Specialist bathrooms are available on each level of the home. There are a range of public areas including a lounge on each floor, dining room, and café. There are communal secure gardens with good access from the building.

The home had a registered manager. 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.

People and their families described the care as safe. Staff had been trained to recognise signs of abuse and knew the actions they needed to take if abuse was suspected. People were protected from avoidable harm as risk assessments had been carried out, were regularly reviewed and staff understood the actions needed to minimise identified risks. People were involved in decisions about how their risks were managed and had their freedoms and choices respected.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and they had been recruited safely which included obtaining employment references and carrying out a criminal record check. People were supported by staff who had completed an induction and on-going training to enable them to carry out their roles effectively. Staff were supported and received regular supervision and had opportunities for professional development. Nurses received training than kept their clinical skills up to date.

Medicine had been ordered, stored and administered safely by trained staff. Staff understood the actions needed if a medicine error occurred. When people self-administered their medicine risk assessments were reviewed monthly with them to ensure theirs and other peoples safety. People had access to healthcare when it was needed.

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.

People and their families described staff as caring, kind and patient and we observed relaxed, friendly interactions between people and the staff. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of people’s individual communication needs and supported people in ways that enabled them to be involved in decisions and express their wishes. People were involved in decisions about their day to day life’s and had their independence, privacy and dignity respected. People who needed an independent representative to speak on their behalf had access to an advocacy service a complaints procedure was in place and people felt if they used it they would be listened to and actions taken.

People had been involved in decisions about how they would like their care needs met and these were regularly reviewed. Care and support plans provided clear information about people’s care needs and staff understood the actions needed to support people and had been kept up dated with changes. People had their eating and drinking needs met and were offered choices of meals and snacks throughout the day. Information about likes, dislikes, allergies and special diets had been shared with the catering team.

People had opportunities to follow hobbies, interests and keep in touch with family and friends. A monthly activity planner provided details of several activities and reflected peoples hobbies and interests. Links had been made with the local community and people and t

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 12 January 2018

The service was safe.

People were supported by staff that had been trained to recognise signs of abuse and knew the actions they needed to take if abuse was suspected.

People had their risks assessed and actions put into place to minimise avoidable harm whilst respecting people’s rights of freedom ad choice.

People were supported by enough staff to meet their needs and who had checks carried out to ensure they were safe to work with vulnerable people.

People had their medicines ordered, stored, administered and recorded safely.

Effective

Good

Updated 12 January 2018

The service was effective.

People were supported by staff that had undergone an induction and ongoing training that enabled them to carry out their roles effectively.

The principles of the Mental Capacity Act were followed ensuring people had their rights and choices respected.

Staff understood peoples individual eating and drinking requirements including allergies and special diets.

People had access to healthcare whenever it was needed.

Caring

Good

Updated 12 January 2018

The service was caring.

People were supported by staff who were kind, patient and friendly.

People had their individual communication needs understood which meant they were able to express their needs and wishes.

People were involved in decisions about their care and had access to an independent advocate if needed.

People had their independence, dignity and privacy respected.

Responsive

Outstanding

Updated 12 January 2018

The service was responsive.

People had their needs assessed, regularly reviewed and they were understood by the care team.

People had opportunities to pursue interests, activities and hobbies and maintain links with the local community.

People had their skills and knowledge respected and were encouraged to actively participate in their community.

A complaints process was in place that people were aware of and felt able us use if needed.

Well-led

Good

Updated 12 January 2018

The service was well led.

The culture was open and transparent and enabled people and the staff to have a voice.

Communication was inclusive and up to date enabling staff to engage with the organisations values and clearly understand their roles and responsibilities.

Quality audit systems were effective at capturing peoples experiences and improving service delivery.