We carried out a review of the data available to us about Lakeside Nursing 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 Lakeside Nursing Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Lakeside Nursing Home is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to up to 35 people. The service provides support to older adults living with a range of health conditions, dementia and disabilities. At the time of our inspection there were 26 people using the service.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People received safe care and support and were protected from avoidable harm. There were robust risk assessments and care plans in place for people and staff knew people and their needs and preferences very well.
People received their medicines safely and medicines administration followed good practice procedures.
There were systems and processes in place to safeguard people from the risk of abuse. Staff had received safeguarding training and knew how to recognise and report abuse.
The service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act.
There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people’s needs and staff recruitment followed safer recruitment best practice guidance.
Infection prevention and control also followed best practice guidance and we were assured the provider was responding effectively to risks and signs of infection and was making sure infection outbreaks could be effectively prevented or managed.
The provider had systems and processes in place that helped to ensure they learnt from best practice research in developing the service. Managers were proactive and engaged in a number of professional networks for sharing learning to improve practice. Managers incorporated research and guidance into the service to improve the care and support provided.
Managers and staff were clear about their roles, they understood regulatory requirements and duty of candour. There were effective quality assurance systems in place and action was taken to improve the service when issues were identified. Staff worked in partnership with other professionals, agencies and organisations to meet people’s needs.
There was a positive culture that was person-centred, open, inclusive, empowering and achieved good outcomes for people. People and their families had choice and could make their own decisions about things. People were supported to be as independent as possible and participate in numerous activities. The provider engaged and involved people, their relatives and staff in the development of the service and included them in making decisions about the service. There was a stable staff team which provided people with continuity of care and managers and staff used creative ways to meet people’s and their families’ needs.
Managers provided staff with a high level of support. They also provided people's families with a high level of personalised support. People, staff and management spoke very positively about each other and feedback from people’s families about the service was very complimentary.
The service had a relaxed, friendly, happy and family orientated atmosphere, and was engaged with the local community.
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 services supported this practice.
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 17 November 2017).
Why we inspected
This inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service.
We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.
For those key questions not inspected, we used the ratings awarded at the last inspection to calculate the overall rating.
The overall rating for the service has remained good based on the findings of this inspection.
You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Lakeside Nursing Home on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
Lakeside Nursing Home provides accommodation, nursing care and support for up to 32 elderly people some of whom were living with dementia. The service had a registered manager in place. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People told us they felt safe with the service they received. Relatives also told us they considered Lakeside to be safe and that people were well cared for. We saw there were arrangements in place to help safeguard people from the risk of abuse. The provider had appropriate policies and procedures in place that informed the registered manager and staff as well as people who used the service about how to report suspected abuse.
People had risk assessments and risk management plans to reduce the likelihood of harm to them. Staff knew how to use the information to keep people safe and work with them positively to help them be as independent as possible.
The provider ensured there were robust recruitment practices to help protect people from the risks of being cared for by staff assessed as unfit or unsuitable. There were appropriate numbers of staff on duty to meet people’s needs.
Medicines were stored, managed and administered safely. People had individual medicines profiles which were reviewed every six months. An appropriate risk management plan was in place that related to the administration of medicines to people.
People received effective care because staff were appropriately trained and supported to do their jobs.
Staff had received appropriate training and had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). DoLS provides a process to make sure people are only deprived of their liberty in a safe and correct way.
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 were supported to have a varied and balanced diet and food that they enjoyed. They were enabled to eat and drink well and stay healthy.
People and relatives told us the service was very caring and they spoke highly of the care and support that was provided. People felt they mattered and they said they felt understood by staff.
People were encouraged and supported by staff to maximise their abilities through the activities programme they told us they enjoyed.
When people needed care and support from healthcare professionals, staff ensured people received this promptly. From our observations we saw staff respected people’s privacy and treated them with respect and dignity.
People had care plans outlining the goals for their care they had contributed to and what support they required from staff to achieve them. People were involved in planning their care and their views were sought and planned for as a central and important part of the process. The service regularly monitored people’s changing needs and involved them in discussions about any changes needed to be made to their care plans.
People were encouraged to maintain relationships with the people that were important to them. Relatives and other visitors were made to feel welcome and told us they were free to visit people living at Lakeside.
There was a complaints process in place, well-advertised so people knew how to raise any concerns they had and felt confident they would be responded to in a timely manner.
People gave positive feedback about the management of the service and the staff group providing the care and support to people. We found a calm, relaxed atmosphere in the home on the day of our inspection, yet we were aware the service was well organised and purposeful. The manager and the staff were approachable and fully engaged with providing good quality care for people who used the service. There were systems in place to continually monitor the quality of the service and people were asked for their opinions via feedback surveys. Action plans were developed where required to address any areas that needed attention.
This inspection took place on 24 April and 1 May 2015 and was unannounced.
Lakeside Nursing Home provides nursing care for up to 41 residents with dementia and mental health issues. There were 28 people using the service at the time of our inspection.
We last inspected Lakeside Nursing Home in September 2013. At that inspection we found the service was meeting all the regulations that we assessed.
There is no requirement for a manager to be registered at this service as the registered provider is in day to day charge of the service. However, the service does have a manager. Registered providers have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
We found that medicines were not always managed safely. The provider took immediate action to implement a more robust method of receiving medicines into the home.
Staff were aware of their responsibility to protect people from harm or neglect. Recruitment procedures were robust and ensured only suitably vetted staff were employed.
Individual risk assessments were in place for people that identified risks and appropriate control measures were operated to minimise risk. These were regularly reviewed to provide correct guidance and support and enable staff to deliver safe care.
People’s nutritional needs were met and people could choose what to eat and drink on a daily basis. The meal times were an enjoyable experience for people. People received support with eating and drinking sufficient amounts to meet their needs. Care arrangements and risk management considered when a person required a special diet or had particular problems with their food or with swallowing.
Staff received on-going professional development through regular supervisions, and training that was specific to the needs of people was available. Staff felt the dementia care training they received helped them understand what could make a difference; this helped them provide a better quality of care for people with dementia.
People found care staff were kind and compassionate. Staff engagement was positive, and interactions demonstrated staff had built a good rapport with people. People who required support were assisted in a dignified manner with care staff interacting and supporting the person.
Care staff provided a consistent level of care. They were familiar with the people they looked after and knew their life histories, and they were able to apply this knowledge to the care and support they offered to people on a daily basis.
Staff were supported in practice and were aware of their responsibilities and the standards expected of them when providing care and support to people living at the home.
The provider worked well with other agencies to help drive improvement in the service, an example was seen in how the service implemented the Namaste programme and trained staff to improve dementia care. An external social care professional told us the provider was willing to listen to the views of external professionals and take on board their advice and recommendations.
The home used the Namaste Programme to help staff provide a calm and stimulating environment through the use of music, aromatherapy and activities. One person told us 'I like coming to the activities club; there are people to talk to and no telly.' Another said 'you meet a lot of people to socialise with.'
People who were unable to communicate verbally looked calm and comfortable and seemed to enjoy the aromatherapy given by the staff. We spoke to four relatives of people living in the home who praised the service and the staff. They commented on the positive atmosphere, the love, care and support given to their relatives and the support staff gave to them. They were glad that there were things their relatives could do in the day and felt that people were safe and well cared for.
Few people in the home were able to give consent to their care. It was clear from our observations that people's consent was obtained where possible and care given was in line with people's assessed needs.
People had plenty of home cooked food and drink and there was enough assistance to help people to eat if they needed it. Staff recruitment procedures included checks on suitability of staff and their qualifications. Confidential records were kept securely and the premises were suitable for their use.
We saw the satisfaction surveys that had been completed recently by representatives of people using the service and they were happy with the care being provided in the home.
We spoke to a number of relatives during our visit to the home and they were very pleased with the care given and were kept well informed and involved in the care of their family members. All those who took part in this review are thanked for their time and contribution to share their views about the service.
The service changed ownership in October last year. The people who were able to give feedback and their representatives/relatives were happy with the new management and the way the home is running. One relative commented that the care was excellent.