1 June 2017
During a routine inspection
Pembroke Lodge Rest Home provides personal care and support for up to 19 people. Nursing care is not provided. Care is provided to older people for long term or respite care. On the day of our inspection there were 13 people living at the service.
At the last inspection on 9 and10 December 2014, the service was rated Good. One area was identified as in need of improvement and two recommendations were made. We found work had been completed to address this. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
People told us they felt the service was safe. On relative told us they thought the service was safe because,” You can’t just walk in here which is good.” People remained protected from the risk of abuse because staff understood how to identify and report it.
People felt there were enough staff and staff were skilled to meet the needs of people and provide effective care. One person told us, “They always come if we need them.” Another person told us, “The staffs is very good they couldn’t be better. There’s always someone on all night.” A third person said, “The staff are friendly and couldn’t be more helpful.” People were supported by staff who had been through robust recruitment procedures.
The provider continued to have arrangements in place for the safe ordering, administration, storage and disposal of medicines. People were supported to get their medicine safely when they needed it. People were supported to maintain good health and had access to health care services.
Staff considered peoples capacity using the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) as guidance. People’s capacity to make decisions had been assessed. 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. The provider was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).
People remained encouraged to express their views and had completed surveys. Feedback received showed people were satisfied overall, and felt staff were friendly and helpful. People said they felt listened to and any concerns or issues they raised were addressed.
People told us the food was good and plentiful. One person told us, “We never go hungry or thirsty here, the food is always good there is a very good chef and he cooks nicely.” A relative told us, “The food is lovely, like home cooked.” Staff told us that an individual's dietary requirements formed part of their pre-admission assessment and people were regularly consulted about their food preferences. Healthcare professionals, including speech and language therapists had been consulted with as required.
Staff continued to feel fully supported by management to undertake their roles. Staff were given training updates, supervision and development opportunities. One member of staff told us, “I did safeguarding only last week. We were told that if there was a request for additional training such as nutrition the management would arrange that.”
The service continued to have a relaxed and homely feel. Everyone we spoke with spoke highly of the caring and respectful attitude of a consistent staff team which we observed throughout the inspection. One person told us,“ Staff are lovely they can’t do enough for us, whatever I ask they do and some of them go out of their way.” A relative told us,” We’re very impressed you can tell they are happy here, it’s very relaxed.”
Staff told us that communication throughout the service continued to be good and included comprehensive handovers at the beginning of each shift and staff meetings. They confirmed that they felt valued and supported by the managers, who they described as very approachable. People told us the service was well managed. One person told us,“ It’s managed well.”
Further information is in the detailed findings below.