You are here

Ridgeway Lodge Care Home Requires improvement

The provider of this service changed - see old profile


Inspection carried out on 21 August 2020

During an inspection looking at part of the service

Ridgeway Lodge Care Home is a ‘care home’ providing accommodation, nursing and personal care. It is registered to provide a service for up to 61 people.

We found the following examples of good practice.

¿ The service was receiving professional visitors to the service with robust infection control procedures in place. Visitors were provided with a designated preparation area on arrival in which they were provided with guidance, personal protective equipment (PPE) and a health screening questionnaire was completed. Each visitor also had their temperatures checked by staff on arrival.

¿ The service had taken steps to alleviate feelings of loneliness or isolation being experienced by people. The service had a ‘Wellbeing Lead’ who was involved in developing activities for people and supporting telephone and video calls to their relatives and friends. The registered manager and deputy manager also told us of other actions the Wellbeing lead had taken to boost morale of people and staff; such a visit by the local fire service on a ‘Clap for Carers’ Thursday and the sharing of uniform/linen bags and small gifts for staff which had been donated by members of the community.

¿ The provider had developed a robust package of policies, procedures and guidance for locations which the registered manager had successfully implemented at the location.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

Inspection carried out on 23 January 2020

During a routine inspection

About the service

Ridgeway Lodge is a care home registered to provide care and support for up to 61 people. The service consists of two floors, with different units accommodating people with specific care needs, such as dementia and residential care. At the time of the inspection, 58 people were living at the service.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People, relatives and staff said there were not always enough staff to support people in a timely way. People had not been harmed, but this had a potential to put people at risk because waiting, for example, to go to the toilet or to move, could impact on their dignity, health and welfare. Staff told us they could not give enough time to support people as they wished or respond to them quick enough. This was because they were too busy. Although there was an assessment in place to consider staffing numbers, this did not accurately reflect the needs of people or the actual experience of practical delivery of care.

Improvements were also required in the quality of the information in people’s daily records so that these clearly reflected people’s experiences and their individuality. The provider's quality monitoring processes were not always effective at ensuring that people always received truly person-centred care.

However, people said they received good care and were supported well to meet their needs. They told us staff were kind, caring and provided care in a respectful manner. Relatives were happy with how staff supported their family members.

Potential risks to people’s health and wellbeing had been managed well. People were protected from abuse because staff were trained to identify and report concerns. Staff were recruited safely. People were supported to take their medicines safely. Lessons were learnt from incidents to prevent recurrence. Staff followed set processes to prevent the spread of infections.

Staff had been trained to meet people's needs. The provider reviewed if they needed to do more to support staff to learn new skills and improve on existing ones. People had enough to eat and drink, but more needed to be done to ensure there were enough staff to support people who needed help to eat. This would also improve people’s dining experience. People had access to healthcare services when required, and this helped them to maintain their health and well-being.

Staff were respectful in how they interacted with people and supported them. 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.

There were plans to further improve the amount and quality of activities provided to ensure people were active and not socially isolated. Complaints were followed up and improvements made when required.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was good (published 28 July 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.


We have identified breaches in relation to staffing levels and the provider’s quality monitoring systems at this inspection. You can see what action we have asked the provider to take at the end of this full report.

Follow up

We will request an action plan from the provider to understand what they will do to improve the standards of quality and safety. We will work alongside the provider and local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Inspection carried out on 20 June 2017

During a routine inspection

We carried out an unannounced inspection on 20 and 21 June 2017.

Ridgeway Lodge Care Home is a purpose built home for up to 61 older people with a diagnosis of dementia and is registered with the Care Quality Commission as a care home without nursing.

The service has a registered manager in place. 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.

This service has been in Special Measures. Services that are in Special Measures are kept under review and inspected again within six months. We expect services to make significant improvements within this timeframe. During this inspection the service demonstrated to us that improvements have been made and is no longer rated as inadequate overall or in any of the key questions. Therefore, this service is now out of Special Measures.

There were risk assessments in place that gave guidance to staff on how risks to people could be minimised and how to safeguard people from the risk of possible harm. In our previous inspection we had found that people’s medication was not managed in a safe manner. In this inspection we found that this was no longer an issue and the provider had created more robust processes to ensure that people's medicines were managed safely.

There was enough staff available to support people to be safe in the home. In our previous inspection we had found that staff were not effectively deployed around the home to safely meet people's needs. During this inspection we found that this was no longer a concern and there was adequate staff deployed around the home to support people.

Detailed audits were now in place to monitor the management of the service and identify any issues with documentations but we found that the process was still a work in progress.

The provider had robust recruitment processes in place. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities and would seek people's consent before they provided any care or support. Staff received supervision and support, and had been trained to meet people's individual needs.

People were supported by caring and respectful staff who knew them well. Staff were given the opportunity to get to know the people they supported through keyworker roles.

People's needs had been assessed, and care plans took account of their individual, preferences, and choices. Staff supported people to maintain their health and well-being.

Feedback was encouraged from people and the manager acted on the comments received to continually improve the quality of the service. The provider had quality monitoring processes in place to ensure that they were meeting the required standards of care. There was a formal process for handling complaints and concerns which were investigated and resolved in a timely manner.