You are here

Stockton Lodge Care Home Requires improvement

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 20 August 2019

About the service

Stockton Lodge care home is a care home which provides personal care for up to 42 people who are young adults or adults aged 65 and over. On the first day of inspection 34 people were using the service. The service was a purpose-built building which accommodated people on one floor.

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

Staff were not effective managing people who displayed behaviours. This increased the risk of harm to people. Some risk assessments were generic and did not show how to reduce risk. Medicines were not safely managed. We made a recommendation about staffing levels. There was evidence of lessons learned. Systems to manage the risk of infection were in place. People said they felt safe living at the service.

An improved quality assurance system was in place; however, actions were not always addressed. Staff did not always apply new practices designed to improve the overall quality of the service. There was a lack of oversight by senior staff which impacted on improvement. The quality of record keeping needed to be improved.

Care records were not accurate or up to date. This increased the risk of potential harm. People had good access to a range of activities which reduced their risk of social isolation. Everyone knew how to make a complaint. Where complaints had been made, they had been addressed.

People were supported with their nutritional needs. They spoke positively about the food provided. People had regular access to health professionals. Staff had good links with health professionals. Staff were supported to carry out their roles. Further improvements were planned to update the environment.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

Staff had good knowledge of people’s needs; their practices promoted people’s independence and well-being. People were involved in all aspects of their care. They told us their care was individualised and dignified at all times.

Rating at last inspection and update

The last rating for this service was requires improvement (Published 1 June 2018). The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve.

At this inspection enough improvement had not been made and the provider was still in breach of regulations

The service remains rated requires improvement. This service has been rated requires improvement for the last two consecutive inspections.

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.


We have identified two breaches in relation to safe care and treatment and good governance. This meant safe practices were not always in place. The systems in place at the service did not continually support improvement.

Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.

Follow up

We will meet with the provider following this report being published to discuss how they will make changes to ensure they improve their rating to at least good. We will work with the 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 areas


Requires improvement

Updated 20 August 2019

The service was not always safe.

Details are in our safe findings below.



Updated 20 August 2019

The service was effective.

Details are in our effective findings below.



Updated 20 August 2019

The service was caring.

Details are in our caring findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 20 August 2019

The service was not always responsive.

Details are in our responsive findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 20 August 2019

The service was not always well-led.

Details are in our well-led findings below.