You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 14 February 2018

This inspection took place on 8 and 10 January 2018 and was unannounced. This meant the staff and provider did not know we would be visiting.

Washington Lodge 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.

Washington Lodge accommodates up to 65 older people in one adapted building across two floors. Some of the people were receiving nursing care and some were living with a dementia type illness. On the days of our inspection, there were 39 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.

Washington Lodge had not previously been inspected by CQC under the current provider.

Accidents and incidents were appropriately recorded and investigated, and risk assessments were in place for people who used the service that described potential risks and the safeguards in place to mitigate these risks. The registered manager understood their responsibilities with regard to safeguarding and staff had been trained in safeguarding vulnerable adults.

Medicines were stored safely and securely, and procedures were in place to ensure people received medicines as prescribed.

The home was clean, spacious and suitable for the people who used the service 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 training was arranged for any due refresher training. Staff received regular supervisions and an annual appraisal.

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 protected from the risk of poor nutrition and staff were aware of people’s nutritional 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 Washington Lodge. Staff treated people with dignity and respect and helped to maintain people’s independence by encouraging them to care for themselves where possible.

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

Care records showed people’s needs were assessed before they started using the service and support plans were written in a person-centred way.

Activities were arranged for people who used the service based on their likes and interests and to help meet their social needs. The service had good links with the local community.

People who used the service and family members were aware of how to make a complaint however there had been no formal written complaints recorded at the service.

The provider had an effective quality assurance process in place. Staff said they felt supported by the registered manager and were comfortable raising any concerns. People who used the service, family members and staff were regularly consulted about the quality of the service via meetings and surveys.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 14 February 2018

The service was safe.

Staffing levels were appropriate to meet the needs of people who used the service and the provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure in place.

Accidents and incidents were appropriately recorded and investigated, appropriate risk assessments were in place and staff had been trained in how to protect vulnerable adults.

People were protected against the risks associated with the unsafe use and management of medicines.

Effective

Good

Updated 14 February 2018

The service was effective.

Staff were suitably trained and received regular supervisions and appraisals.

People’s needs were assessed before they began using the service. People had access to healthcare services and received ongoing healthcare support.

The provider was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA).

Caring

Good

Updated 14 February 2018

The service was caring.

Staff treated people with dignity and respect and independence was promoted.

People were well presented and staff talked with people in a polite and respectful manner.

People had been involved in writing their care plans and their wishes were taken into consideration.

Responsive

Good

Updated 14 February 2018

The service was responsive.

Support plans were written in a person-centred way.

The home had a full programme of activities in place for people who used the service.

The provider had an effective complaints policy and procedure in place and people knew how to make a complaint.

Well-led

Good

Updated 14 February 2018

The service was well-led.

The service had a positive culture that was person-centred, open and inclusive.

The provider had a robust quality assurance system in place and gathered information about the quality of their service from a variety of sources.

The service had good links with the local community.