Archived: Kestrel Lodge Care Home

Updated 24 February 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 28 October 2015 and was unannounced.

Before the inspection we reviewed information the provider had sent us including statutory notifications. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.

The inspection team consisted of one inspector and an expert by experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

As part of the inspection we spoke with seven people who used the service about the care and support they received. We also spoke with three people’s representatives.

We spoke with the registered manager and a regional manager who worked for the provider. We also spoke with the deputy manager, three care staff, the cook, the administrator and the maintenance person. A visiting health professional also shared their views about the service with us.

We looked at three care records, three staff recruitment files and other records relevant to the running of the service. This included policies and procedures and information about staff training. We also looked at the provider’s quality assurance systems.

Updated 24 February 2016

We inspected the service on 28 October 2015. Kestrel Lodge is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide accommodation and personal care for up to 33 older people with or without dementia. On the day of our inspection there were 21 people living at the home.

The home had a registered manager. 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.

People who used the service, and their representatives, felt safe and well looked after at Kestrel Lodge. People told us that staff met their needs effectively and were all kind and caring. Staff told us that they loved working at the home and we found that they were very knowledgeable about people’s needs, preferences and life experiences. Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity.

Staff had a good understanding of what constituted abuse and would be confident to recognise and report it. However we found that on one occasion the registered manager could not demonstrate that they had protected people by following up on concerns raised to them.

There were sufficient staff on duty to meet people’s needs effectively and staff were recruited through safe recruitment practices. Medicines were stored and administered safely and the premises were well maintained to keep people safe.

Staff received appropriate induction, training and supervision. Staff were very positive about the support and training they received. They told us that they had received training to equip them with the knowledge and skills to support people effectively. They also received training in relation to meeting individual health care needs, such as dementia and diabetes. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities.

People’s rights were protected under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 although some decisions needed to be reviewed when individual’s needs and circumstances changed to ensure they still reflected their wishes.

People were provided with sufficient food and drink to maintain their good health and wellbeing, and the standard of food provided was very good. Health professionals worked closely with the home to ensure people’s health care needs were met. Communication between staff and outside agencies was good.

People enjoyed a range of activities both at the home and in the community.

People and their relatives were involved, or had opportunities to be involved, in the development of the service. People felt listened to and would be confident to make a complaint or raise a concern if they needed to. Staff knew the complaints procedure and we saw outside agencies had supported people with decision making when appropriate. People living at the home and the staff team had opportunities to be involved in discussions about the running of the home and felt the management team provided good leadership. There were systems in place to monitor the quality of the service provided.