You are here

Pear Tree Lodge Residential Home Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 31 October 2018

This inspection took place on 17 September 2018 and was unannounced.

Pear Tree Lodge is a care home without nursing that provides a service for up to 36 older people living with dementia and/or a physical disability. On the day of our inspection visit there were 18 people living in the service. 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

This was the first inspection of this service since Hellendoorn Healthcare Limited registered to operate Pear Tree Lodge. When they registered to provide services at Pear Tree Lodge they gave us an action plan as to how they intended to improve the quality of the service provided. At this inspection we found that they had followed the action plan keeping to timescales and improving the quality of care people received.

There was a registered manager as required who had registered when Hellendoorn Healthcare Limited had taken over the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the 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.

Extensive building work had been carried out and was still underway during our inspection. This had been planned to provide the minimum disruption to people living at Pear Tree Lodge. People were complimentary about the standard of the improvements.

People felt safe living at the service and were protected from risks relating to their care and welfare. Staff knew how to recognise the signs of abuse and were aware of actions to take if they felt people were at risk.

People were protected by the provider's recruitment processes. Safe recruitment practices were followed before new staff were employed to work with people. Required checks were made to ensure staff were of good character and suitable for their role.

People received care and support from staff who knew them well. Staff training was up to date and staff felt they received the training they needed to carry out their work safely and effectively. People received support that was individualised to their personal preferences and needs. Their needs were monitored and care plans were reviewed monthly or as changes occurred.

People received effective health care and support. Medicines were stored and handled correctly and safely. 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.

Meals were nutritious and varied. People told us they enjoyed the meals at the service and confirmed they were given choices.

People were treated with care and kindness. People's wellbeing was protected and all interactions observed between staff and people living at the service were respectful and friendly. People confirmed staff respected their privacy and dignity.

People and relatives were aware of how to make a complaint. They told us they could approach

management and staff with any concerns and felt they would listen and take action. They benefitted from living at a service that had an open and friendly culture and from a staff team that were happy in their work.

People living at the service and their relatives felt there was a good atmosphere and thought the service was managed well. Staff also felt the service was well-managed. They told us the management were open with them and communicated what was happening at the service and with the people living there.

The management team had a clear vision for developing the service which was demonstrated by the actions they had taken since registering to run the service and plans in place for future improvement.

Inspection areas



Updated 31 October 2018

The service was safe.

Risk assessments were in place to address any identified risk and actions were in place to mitigate that risk.

There were systems in place to protect people from abuse. Staff knew how to safeguard people from the risk of abuse and how to pass on concerns to relevant agencies.

Medicines were administered and managed safely.

There were sufficient staff available to meet people's needs. Systems were in place to ensure staff were recruited safely.



Updated 31 October 2018

The service was effective.

People's consent was sought prior to care being given and staff

followed legislation designed to protect people's rights.

Staff completed an induction and training programme. Training for staff was updated regularly.

Staff received ongoing support and development through

supervisions and appraisal.

The environment was being improved to better meet people’s needs.

People's health and nutritional needs were met.



Updated 31 October 2018

The service was caring.

People felt staff were kind and caring and that they were listened to.

Staff were relaxed and friendly and knew people well. They were patient and built positive relationships, treating people with dignity and respect

People's individual diverse needs were known and met by staff.



Updated 31 October 2018

The service was responsive.

People's needs were assessed and care files included information and guidance for staff about how their needs should be met.

There were activities and entertainment for people to participate in at both group and individual level.

People knew about the home's complaint's procedure.



Updated 31 October 2018

The service was well-led.

There were clear plans to develop and improve the service.

The registered manager and provider recognised the importance of

regularly monitoring the quality of the service provided. The management team were involved in day to day care and supervision of staff.

There were regular meetings with staff and management to aid communication and to ensure quality was maintained within the service.

Staff said they enjoyed working at the home and they received good support from the provider and manager.