You are here

Melba Lodge Limited Good Also known as 16 Heverham Road

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 29 August 2018

This inspection took place on the 8 August 2018 and was unannounced. Melba Lodge Limited 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. Melba Lodge Limited provides accommodation and personal care for up to four people with mental health needs. There were four people living at the service at the time of our inspection.

At our last inspection on 3 July 2017 we found breaches of Regulations 12 and 19 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 due to concerns that risks to people’s health and welfare were not always managed safely and the provider had not always followed safe recruitment practices when employing new staff.

At this inspection we found appropriate procedures were in place to support people where risks to their health and welfare had been identified. We also found that robust recruitment checks were being carried out before staff were employed to work at the home.

The home had a registered manager in post. 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’. The registered manager was also the registered provider of the home. 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.

There were safeguarding and whistle blowing procedures in place and staff had a clear understanding of these procedures. There was enough staff and staff were attentive to people’s needs. People received support with medicines when required. There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable emergencies and there were systems in place to monitor infection control, the safety of the premises and equipment used within the home.

Staff had completed an induction when they started work and received training relevant to people’s needs. 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 support this practice. People were encouraged to eat healthy meals and to cook for themselves. Staff monitored people’s health and welfare and where there were concerns people were referred to appropriate health professionals.

People were provided with appropriate information about the service. This ensured they were aware of the standard of care they should expect. People’s privacy and dignity was respected. People had been consulted about their care and support needs. These needs were assessed before they moved into the home. People’s care plans included sections on their diverse needs. Staff had received training on equality and diversity during their induction. There was a wide range of activities for people to partake in if they wished to do so. The home had a complaints procedure in place and people said they were confident their complaints would be listened to and acted on. None of the people living at the home required support with end of life care. However the registered manager knew which care providers to contact to access this type of care and support if it was required.

The provider recognised the importance of regularly monitoring the quality of the service. Regular health and safety, medicines, fire safety and incidents and accidents audits were carried out at the home. They worked with other care providers and professional bodies to make sure people received good care. The provider considered people, their relatives and staff views of the service through regular satisfaction surveys. There was an out of hours on call system in operation that ensured management support and advice was always available for staff when they needed it. Staff said they liked wo

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 29 August 2018

The service was safe.

Risks to people were assessed and reviewed regularly to ensure their needs were safely met.

There were robust recruitment practices in place and appropriate recruitment checks were conducted before staff started work.

The service had safeguarding and whistle-blowing procedures in place and staff had a clear understanding of these procedures.

Sufficient numbers of staff were deployed to meet people's

care and support needs.

Medicines were managed appropriately and people received their medicines as prescribed by health care professionals.

There were arrangements in place to deal with foreseeable

emergencies and systems in place to monitor infection control, the safety of the premises and equipment used within the home.

Effective

Good

Updated 29 August 2018

The service was effective.

Assessments of people’s care and support needs were carried out before people moved into the home.

Staff had completed an induction when they started work and they received training relevant to people’s needs.

The registered manager demonstrated a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and acted according to this legislation.

People were encouraged to eat healthy meals and to cook for themselves.

Assessments of people’s care and support needs were carried out before people moved into the home.

Staff had completed an induction when they started work and they received training relevant to people’s needs.

The registered manager demonstrated a clear understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and acted according to this legislation.

People were encouraged to eat healthy meals and to cook for themselves.

The home environment was clean and suitably adapted to meet people’s needs.

People had access to health care professionals when they needed them.

People had access to health care professionals when they needed them.

Caring

Good

Updated 29 August 2018

The service was caring.

Staff treated people in a caring, respectful and dignified manner.

People and their relatives, where appropriate, had been involved in planning for their care needs.

People were provided with appropriate information about the service. This ensured they were aware of the standard of care they should expect.

Responsive

Good

Updated 29 August 2018

The service was responsive.

People had care plans and risk assessments that provided guidance for staff on how to support them with their needs.

People’s care plans included sections on their diverse needs. Staff had received training on equality and diversity during their induction.

There was a range of appropriate activities available for people to enjoy.

People knew about the home’s complaints procedure and said they were confident their complaints would be fully investigated and action taken if necessary.

None of the people living at the home required support with end of life care. However, the provider knew how to access support if it was required.

Well-led

Good

Updated 29 August 2018

The home had a registered manager in post.

The registered manager recognised the importance of regularly monitoring the quality of the service they provided to people.

The registered manager worked with other care providers and professional bodies to make sure people received good care.

The registered manager considered people, their relatives and staffs views of the service through regular satisfaction surveys.

There was an out of hours on call system in operation that ensured management support and advice was always available for staff when they needed it.

Staff said they liked working at the home and they received good support from the registered manager and deputy manager.