We carried out a review of the data available to us about Lindale Residential Care Home 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 Lindale Residential Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
¿ A ‘foot bath’ was located at the main entrance into the home. Visitors stood on the foot bath mat and their outdoor shoes were disinfected before entering the home to prevent the transmission of infection.
¿ On arrival to the home visitors completed a Covid-19 health screening questionnaire. Their temperature was recorded, and they could be provided with personal protective equipment (PPE) including disposable gloves, aprons and masks to protect people from risk of infection.
¿ The home had limited environmental space. Staff encouraged people to effectively and safely socially distance.
¿ Staff changed their clothes upon starting and finishing their shifts to reduce the risk of cross infection.
¿ Specialist cleaning equipment had been purchased to complete deep cleans of the environment. Use of the equipment meant areas that were difficult to clean were effectively sanitised.
¿ People were supported by staff to stay safe when they went out. For example, attending appointments.
Lindale is a residential care home providing personal care to people who have learning and/or physical disabilities The service can support up nine people. The home is set out over two floors with two shared lounges, a kitchen and a dining room on the ground floor. People’s bedrooms and bathrooms are on both floors. Nine people were living at the service at the time of the inspection.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People and their relatives told us how happy they were with the support people received. Typical comments from relatives included, “[Person’s name] never wants to come back with us which is a good sign.”
There were enough staff to meet people’s needs and checks had been carried out to make sure staff were suitable to work in the home. People received their medication at the right time and staff knew how to keep people safe.
Staff received sufficient training to enable them to deliver effective care which met people’s needs. People’s health was monitored and people had access to food which they enjoyed.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Staff treated people with kindness and respect and allowed people to maintain and develop their independence. People were supported to maintain links with families and friends who were important to them.
The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.
The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion. People's support focused on them having as many opportunities as possible for them to gain new skills and become more independent.
The service was well led and the registered manager had clear expectations about delivering good quality care. The service had developed a number of partnerships with other agencies which enabled people to enjoy being part of the local community.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 03 September 2016)
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
Lindale Residential Care Home (Lindale) is registered as providing accommodation for a maximum of 9 persons with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder who require personal care.
There was a registered manager in post. 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 were protected from abuse because staff were trained in identifying and dealing with suspected abuse and safeguarding.
We saw staff were available to meet people’s needs and manage risks associated with providing care for people living at the home. We found that staff were effective in ensuring people received their medications safely.
The provider had ensured that suitably qualified staff provided care to people who used the service. People were able to consent to the care they received from the staff.
People’s health care needs were effectively met by the staff and the registered manager.
People liked living at Lindale and had positive views of the staff. Staff interactions with people were warm and friendly. The staff were knowledgeable about people’s likes and dislikes. Staff ensured that people’s privacy and dignity was maintained.
People were involved in planning their care and activities. The registered manager had received no complaints from people or their relatives recently. We could see that learning had taken place from past complaints.
The registered manager carried out audits to evaluate the quality of the service provided to people.
Following our inspection in July 2013, we also issued a warning notice for regulation 10. This was because we found that effective systems were not in place to assess and monitor the quality of service that people received or ensure that the provider, identified monitored and managed risks. We did a follow up inspection in November 2013 to see if the provider had met the requirements of the warning notice and we found that they had. The purpose of this inspection was to see if the provider was now compliant with the remaining outcomes, we found that the necessary improvements were made.
On the day of our inspection seven people lived at the home. Due to some of the people's limited verbal communication skills we briefly spoke with three of the people who lived at the home. Other people were unable to verbally share with us their views about their care due to their individual needs. We used different ways to evidence their experience, such as observing care and looking at their care records, we also spoke with three relatives. We spoke with two members of staff, the registered manager and looked at four sets of staff records.
People experienced care and support that met their needs and protected their rights. One person told us, 'I went out today and had a nice time'.
Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff were confident that they would recognise and report any allegations of abuse so that people were protected from the risk of harm. A relative told us, 'I cannot fault the care, it's very good'.
Recruitment processes were in place which gave people who used the service, some assurance that only suitable staff had been employed.
We found that there were enough staff employed to meet people's needs safely and people were cared for by staff who were supported, supervised and trained to deliver care to an appropriate standard. A relative told us, 'The staff are able to meet their needs, I am more than happy'.
We saw that care records reflected people's individual needs and were accessible to staff when needed.
At the time of our inspection there were eight people who lived at the home, we spoke with four people and looked at two sets of care records. We also spoke with the registered manager and two members of staff.
We saw that improvements were made in the provider's quality assurance systems. This meant that the risks to people had been reduced. Areas of improvements included the implementation of an effective auditing system to ensure standards of care were regularly monitored and that people were able to give feedback on the quality of service. One person told us, 'We have a meeting every Sunday to talk about things'.
Care was not always planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.One person told us that the lack of activities meant, "It's boring".
Safeguarding procedures were not robust enough to ensure that staff were alert to allegations of abuse and people were not at risk of harm.
Recruitment processes had not been as thorough as they should have been to give assurance that only suitable staff had been employed.
There was not enough staff on duty at all times to ensure that staff were able to respond to an emergency safely and effectively.
Lack of appropriate training meant that not all staff had the knowledge and skills to provide care that was safe and effective.One person said,"Staff don't want to know".
The system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people who use the service and others was not robust to be fully effective.
Care records did not always fully reflect people's needs.
Most of the people living in the home had lived there for several years and they all seemed relaxed in the company of staff. One person told us 'It's OK living here.' They also said they generally 'got on' with the other people who lived there and they would tell staff if something was worrying them.
People's privacy and dignity were respected. One person showed us their room, which had their personal belongings in it. We saw staff treat people with respect, talking with them and helping them at a pace the person was comfortable with.
People were involved in making decisions about their care and support. They met together every Sunday to talk about what they wanted to do. One person said they were 'going to see their family' at the weekend. Another person told us they had started talking about where they would go on holiday later this year.
Staff had a good understanding of people's needs and preferences and what they needed to do to meet these needs. However, people's care records were not fully complete or accurate.