You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 16 February 2018

This inspection took place on 6 and 7 December 2017 and was unannounced. This meant the staff and provider did not know we would be visiting.

Lindisfarne Care Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Lindisfarne Care Home accommodates 61 people in one adapted building across three separate floors. Some of the people using the service were living with dementia. On the days of our inspection there were 60 people using the service.

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 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.

We last inspected the service in October 2015 and rated the service as ‘Good.’ At this inspection we found the service remained ‘Good’ and met all the fundamental standards we inspected against.

Accidents and incidents were appropriately recorded and risk assessments were in place. The registered manager understood their responsibilities with regard to safeguarding and staff had been trained in safeguarding vulnerable adults.

Procedures were in place for the safe administration and storage of medicines. However, some as required medicines were not appropriately recorded.

The home was clean, spacious and suitable for the people who used the service. Infection control audits were carried out monthly and an overall audit conducted annually, and appropriate health and safety checks had been carried out.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty in order to meet the needs of people who used the service. The provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure in place and carried out relevant vetting checks when they employed staff. Staff were suitably trained and received regular supervisions and appraisals.

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. However, some mental capacity assessments were blank or were not decision specific. Some of the consent to care and treatment records were not signed by people or their representatives.

People were supported with their dietary needs. Care records contained evidence of people being supported during visits to and from external health care specialists.

People who used the service and family members were complimentary about the standard of care at Lindisfarne Care Home.

Staff treated people with dignity and respect and helped to maintain people’s independence by encouraging them to care for themselves where possible.

The service supported people to access local advocacy services but no-one was currently using advocacy services at the time of our inspection visit.

Care records showed that people’s needs were assessed before they started using the service and care plans were written in a person-centred way. Person-centred is about ensuring the person is at the centre of any care or support plans and their individual wishes, needs and choices are taken into account.

Care plans were in place that recorded people’s plans and wishes for their end of life care.

Activities were arranged for people who used the service based on their likes and interests and to help meet their social needs.

The provider had an effective complaints procedure in place and people who used the service and family members were aware of how to make a complaint.

The provider had an effective quality assurance process in place. Staff said they felt supported by the registered manager. People who used the service, family member

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 16 February 2018

The service remained Good.

Effective

Requires improvement

Updated 16 February 2018

The service was not always effective.

The provider was not always working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) as some mental capacity assessments were blank or were not decision specific. Consent to care and treatment records had not always been signed by the person or their representative.

Staff were suitably trained and received regular supervisions and appraisals.

People had access to healthcare services and received ongoing healthcare support.

Caring

Good

Updated 16 February 2018

The service remained Good.

Responsive

Good

Updated 16 February 2018

The service remained Good.

Well-led

Good

Updated 16 February 2018

The service remained Good.