Winfield Lodge

Updated 2 July 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection team was made up of one Inspector and one 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. The Expert’s area of expertise was older people.

Service and service type

Winfield Lodge is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

The first day of this inspection was unannounced, the second day was announced.

Inspection activity started on 11 June 2019 and ended on 12 June 2019.

What we did before the inspection

The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report.

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with 16 people who used the service and one relative about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with 12 members of staff including the registered manager, area manager, head of operations, two care coordinators, one named carer and care workers.

We reviewed a range of records. This included four people’s care records and multiple medication records. We looked at three staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision and a variety of records relating to the management of the service.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate evidence found.

Updated 2 July 2019

About the service

Winfield Lodge is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to 33 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 50 people.

The building is laid out over three floors, with lounges on the middle and ground floor, a large dining area on the ground floor and two lifts for people to use, although at the time of the inspection one lift was not working. There is a storage area for equipment such as hoists and wheelchairs. There is a hairdressing salon on the first floor.

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

People told us they felt safe and protected from harm and abuse. Risks were assessed, and staff were confident about identifying potential abuse and actions they would take if abuse was witnessed or suspected. The service was working to develop their staffing dependency tool and currently overstaffed while this was in progress. Medicines and creams were managed and administered safely. The service worked to prevent the spread of infection, this included staff wearing gloves and aprons. The service learned lessons and used the learning to drive improvement.

People told us staff who supported them were caring. We observed caring interactions between staff and people on both days of our inspection. Although people were not aware of what a care plan was, they told us they were involved with making decisions about their care. People told us they were treated with dignity and respect.

People received care that was personalised to meet their needs. Complaints and concerns were responded to appropriately by the service. No one was receiving end of life care at the time of our inspection however we reviewed a compliment and one end of life care plan for a person who had recently passed away. The service had installed technology into the walls that could monitor if a person at risk of falls had fallen.

The service was working to build relationships with organisations in the community including a local school and religious organisation. People were supported to express their views, questionnaires were reviewed by the service to identify areas for improvement. We received mixed comments from staff about the registered manager, however staff told us they worked together as a team to achieve good outcomes for people. There were checks and audits in place to ensure that errors, omissions and themes and trends were identified, and actions taken to prevent a recurrence.

Peoples’ needs were assessed, and detailed care plans guided staff about actions they should take to meet the needs of people and help them to retain their independence. Staff received training relevant to their roles, however the service had identified that equality training was an area for development. People were supported to eat and drink, the service was working to improve the dining experience and planned to introduce a buffet. Staff worked together as a team and worked well with external healthcare professionals to ensure good outcomes for people. People’s needs were met by the home environment, the service was working with people to improve the décor in line with their requirements. Staff ensured consent was gained before providing care.

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.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 30 August 2017). Since this rating was awarded the registered provider of the service has changed. We have used the previous rating ‘requires improvement’ to inform our planning and decisions about the rating at this inspection.