Archived: Cedar Lodge Care Home

Updated 26 June 2015

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 27 and 28 January 2015 and was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of one inspector.

We looked at the information we held about the service and the provider. We looked at statutory notifications the provider had sent us. Statutory notifications are reports the provider is required by law to send to us, to inform us about incidents that have happened at the service, such as an accident or a serious injury.

We spoke with six people who lived at the home, and two relatives. We observed how staff supported people throughout the day. As part of our observations we used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We spoke with the registered manager and the manager from one of the providers other homes. We spoke with three staff. We also spoke to a community nurse and a mental health consultant.

We looked at four records about people’s care, staff rosters, complaint files, meeting minutes for meetings with staff and people that lived at the home. Quality audits that the registered manager and provider had competed.

Updated 26 June 2015

This was an unannounced inspection, which took place on 27 and 28 January 2015.

Cedar Lodge is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for a maximum of 19 people. There were 14 people living at the home at the time of our inspection.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of the inspection. 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. The registered manager had been absent for a period of three months, we had been notified of their absence and suitable support had been arranged. At the time of our visit the registered manager was on a phased return to work.

At our last inspection in April 2014 the provider was not meeting the essential standards of care and welfare, and the assessing and monitoring of the quality of service provision. Following this inspection the provider sent us an action plan to tell us the improvements they were going to make. During this inspection we found the provider had made some improvements.

People and their relatives said they felt safe and staff treated them well. Relatives told us staff were kind and caring and thoughtful towards people. Staff we spoke with understood that they had responsibility to take action to protect people from harm. They demonstrated awareness and recognition of abuse and systems were in place to guide them in reporting these.

People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines.

Staff were knowledgeable about how to manage people’s individual risks, and were able to respond to people’s needs. People were supported by staff with up to date knowledge about providing effective care. We saw that staff treated people with dignity and respect whilst supporting their needs. People’s preferences were taken into account and respected.

We found the provider had consistently followed the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards when assessing people’s ability to make specific decisions. Two applications had been submitted to the supervisory body so the decision to restrict somebody’s liberty was only made by people who had suitable authority to do so.

People had sufficient food and drink to maintain a healthy diet. People were supported to eat and drink well and had access to health professionals in a timely manner. Risks to people’s health and wellbeing were well managed.

Relatives knew how to raise complaints and the provider had arrangements in place so that people were listened to and action taken to make any necessary improvements.

The systems were in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service further improvements were needed to ensure the delivery of a quality service.

The registered manager promoted a positive approach to including people’s views. People and staff were encouraged to be involved in regular meetings to share their thoughts and concerns about the quality of the service.