You are here

Sutton Lodge Residential Care Home Inadequate

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 12 June 2014
Date of Publication: 5 July 2014
Inspection Report published 05 July 2014 PDF | 91.43 KB

Overview

Inspection carried out on 12 June 2014

During a routine inspection

Our inspection team on this occasion was made up of one inspector. We considered our evidence to help us answer our five questions; Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people who use the service, their relatives, the staff supporting them and from looking at records. We also spoke with health and social care professionals before, during and after the visit.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

People were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. People told us they felt safe.

Safeguarding procedures were robust and staff understood how to protect the people they supported.

Systems were in place to make sure that managers and staff learnt from events such as accidents and incidents. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve. Regular checks were undertaken to ensure the environment was safe for people.

the Care Quality Commission monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to people living in care homes. While no applications have needed to be submitted, proper policies and procedures were in place to ensure that people who could not make decisions for themselves were protected.

The service was safe, clean and hygienic. Equipment was well maintained and serviced regularly to ensure its safety. Therefore people were not put at unnecessary risk. However there was no yearly maintenance plan in place to ensure work within the buildings and grounds would continually be maintained.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed with them, and they were involved in writing their plans of care. Specialist dietary, mobility and equipment needs had been identified in care plans where required. People said that they had been involved in writing them and they reflected their current needs.

People's needs were taken into account with signage and the layout of the service enabling people to move around freely and safely.

People told us they could express their views at group meetings, meetings on a one to one basis with staff and by completing surveys.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by kind and attentive staff. We saw that staff showed patience and gave encouragement when supporting people.

People commented, "Staff respect my wishes" and "All my needs are being met."

People who used the service, their relatives, friends and other professionals involved with the service attended meetings throughout the year. Where shortfalls or concerns were raised these were addressed by the provider. People told us they felt their opinions were valued by staff. They told us they also completed questionnaires at regular intervals during the year on a number of different topics.

People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.

Is the service responsive?

People told us they could speak with staff each day and share their concerns. They told us staff acted quickly to address their concerns. Relatives told us they could speak with staff about their family member's needs, when that person could not make decisions for themselves.

Health and social care professionals told us staff reacted quickly to people's needs especially when a person's life was ending.

Is the service well-led?

The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care in a joined up way.

The service had a quality assurance system. Records seen by us showed that identified shortfalls were addressed.. As a result the quality of the service was continuously improving.

Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and quality assurance processes that were in place. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service at all times.