You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 21 November 2017

This was a first comprehensive inspection and was carried out on 24 August 2017. The inspection visit was unannounced.

The Lodge Trust CIO provides accommodation with personal care for up to thirty people with learning disabilities or Autistic Spectrum Disorder. There were four houses and thirteen flats. There was also a range of communal building such as a communal hall, café and woodwork block. The service was set in four acres of land and there was also a country park and caravan park which was open to the public. The Lodge Trust CIO is a conservative evangelical Christian home. People who used the service were expected to follow a Christian lifestyle.

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 2008 and associated regulations about how the service is run.

People were safe. Staff understood their responsibilities to keep people safe from abuse and avoidable harm. There were sufficient numbers of experienced and trained staff to safely meet people’s assessed needs. Recruitment practices were safe and made sure that checks were carried out on people before employment was offered.

People knew what being safe meant and knew what to do if they had any concerns. Risk was assessed and management plans were in place to protect people. There were plans in place to respond to emergencies and these were understood by people who used the service and by staff.

People’s medicines were managed in a safe way so that people received their medicines at the right time and in the right way. People were supported to manage their own medicines if they were able to.

People received care and support from staff who were trained and knew how to meet their needs. Staff had their performance assessed and received supervision and appraisal and were given opportunities to discuss their development needs. Staff had access to the training they required.

Consent was sought before care and support was delivered. Staff knew how to deal with behaviour that challenges others in a safe and effective way. Staff were working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and deprivations of liberty safeguards (DoLS).

People were supported to eat and drink and maintain a balanced diet. Staff knew about people’s nutritional needs and followed guidelines provided by healthcare professionals. People had a choice of meals and said they enjoyed the menu provided. People had access to the healthcare services they required and were supported to make and attend appointments.

People were treated with kindness and compassion. People told us how staff made them feel that they mattered and listened to them. Staff knew people well and took action when people were upset or distressed. People had access to advocacy services should they need help making a decision. People had their privacy and dignity respected and promoted.

People had their needs assessed and regularly reviewed so that their care and support could be adjusted to meet their preferences and needs. People had access to a wide range of recreational and work based activities and were also able to access training.

Concerns and complaints were encouraged and action was taken to resolve issues as soon as a complaint was raised. Improvements were made as a result of complaints or concerns.

There was a positive and open culture. Managers were visible and accessible. There was a clear organisational structure and staff understood their roles and responsibilities. The quality of the service was monitored to check that people were satisfied and policies and procedures were followed.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 21 November 2017

The service was safe.

People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm.

Risk was assessed and people had their freedom supported and respected.

There were enough staff with the right experience and training to meet people's needs. Staff were recruited in a safe way.

People had their medicines at the right time and in a safe way.

Effective

Good

Updated 21 November 2017

The service was effective.

People received care and support that was based on best practice from staff who had the knowledge and skills to meet people's needs.

Consent was sought before delivering care and support in line with legislation and guidance.

People were supported to eat and drink and had a varied and balanced diet.

People had access to the healthcare services they required.

Caring

Good

Updated 21 November 2017

The service was caring.

People valued the relationships they had with the staff team and felt they often went that 'extra mile for them, when providing care and support.

Staff knew people well and showed concern for their wellbeing and took action to relive distress..

People were supported to express their views and were actively involved in making decisions.

People had their privacy and dignity respected.

Responsive

Good

Updated 21 November 2017

The service was responsive.

People received care and support from staff who knew them well and knew how to meet their needs.

A range of activities and work based programmes were available. People were able to follow their interests and hobbies.

People knew how to complain and were confident they would be listened to.

Well-led

Good

Updated 21 November 2017

The service was well led.

There was a positive and open culture that was inclusive and empowering.

People and staff were involved in the development of the service and felt supported by managers.

There was an effective quality monitoring which was used to learn and improve the service.