You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 21 January 2017

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection at Prideaux Lodge on the 14 and 15 October 2015 where two breaches of Regulation were found. We issued requirement notices for these breaches.

As a result we undertook an inspection on 8 and 9 December 2016 to follow up on whether the required actions had been taken. At this inspection we found significant improvements had taken place and no areas requiring improvement were identified.

Prideaux Lodge provides accommodation and support for up to 20 people. Care and support is provided for people living with dementia type illness and who are at risks of falls and long term healthcare needs such as Parkinson’s. On the day of our inspection there were 15 people living at the service. The provider also offers a respite day care service. There was one person who was using this service.

A registered manager was in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People appeared happy and relaxed with staff. There were sufficient staff to support them. When staff were recruited, their employment history was checked, references obtained and comprehensive induction completed. Checks were also undertaken to ensure new staff were safe to work within the care sector. Staff were knowledgeable and trained in safeguarding and knew what action they should take if they suspected abuse was taking place. Appropriate training was provided to ensure staff were confident to meet people’s needs.

It was clear staff and the registered manager had spent considerable time with people, getting to know them, gaining an understanding of their personal history and building rapport with them. People were provided with a choice of healthy food and drink ensuring their nutritional needs were met.

People’s needs had been assessed and detailed care plans developed. Care plans contained risk assessments for a wide range of daily living needs. For example, nutrition, falls, and skin pressure areas. People consistently received the care they required, and staff members were clear on people’s individual needs. Care was provided with kindness and compassion. Staff members were responsive to people’s changing needs. People’s health and wellbeing was continually monitored and the provider regularly liaised with healthcare professionals for advice and guidance.

Medicines were managed safely in accordance with current regulations and guidance. There were systems in place to ensure that medicines had been stored, administered, audited and reviewed appropriately.

The CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. We found that the manager understood when an application should be made and how to submit one. Where people lacked the mental capacity to make specific decisions the home was guided by the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

People were provided with opportunities to take part in activities ‘in-house’ and to access the local and wider community. People were supported to take an active role in decision making regarding their own daily routines and the general flow of their home.

Staff had a clear understanding of the philosophy of the home and they spoke positively about their work and the management. The registered manager undertook regular quality assurance reviews to monitor the standard of the service and drive improvement.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 21 January 2017

The service was safe.

Staff were trained in how to protect people from abuse and knew what to do if they suspected it had taken place.

Staffing numbers were sufficient to ensure people received a safe level of care. Recruitment records demonstrated there were systems in place to ensure staff were suitable to work within the care sector.

Medicines were stored appropriately and associated records showed that medicines were ordered, administered and disposed of in line with current regulations.

Effective

Good

Updated 21 January 2017

The service was effective.

Mental capacity assessments were undertaken for people if required and their freedom was not unlawfully restricted.

People were able to make decisions about what they wanted to eat and drink and were supported to stay healthy. They had access and were supported to health care professional appointments for regular check-ups as needed.

Staff had undertaken essential training as well as additional training specific to the needs of people and had regular supervisions with their manager.

Caring

Good

Updated 21 January 2017

The service was caring.

People felt well cared for and were treated with dignity and respect by kind and friendly staff. They were encouraged to make decisions about their care.

The staff knew the care and support needs of people well and took an interest in people and their families to provide individual personalised care.

Care records were maintained safely and people�s information kept confidentially.

Responsive

Good

Updated 21 January 2017

The service was responsive.

People were supported to take part in a range of activities both in the home and the community. These were organised in line with peoples� preferences. Family members and friends continued to play an important role and people spent time with them.

People and their relatives were asked for their views about the service through questionnaires and surveys.

There were systems in place to respond to comments and complaints.

Care plans were in place to ensure people received care which was personalised to meet their needs, wishes and aspirations.

Well-led

Good

Updated 21 January 2017

The service was well-led.

Staff felt supported by management, said they were supported and listened to and understood what was expected of them.

Systems were in place to ensure accidents and incidents were reported and acted upon. Quality assurance was measured and monitored to enable a high standard of service delivery.

There was an open and positive culture which focussed on providing person-centred care for people.