Godden Lodge Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

We looked at 1 quality statement. Systems to oversee the governance and management of the service were in place. Information was not always used effectively to monitor and improve the quality of care and outcomes for people.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Staff feedback about working at the service was positive. They told us they felt supported and listened to by the management team. The registered manager was approachable, open, and there was good communication at all levels. Senior staff undertook champion roles in preventing the control of infection, pressure care and end of life care. They sought good practice, and this was cascaded through the staff teams. A staff member told us, “The registered manager is a listening person and proactive. If you go to them with a complaint, they will make sure things are done.” There was an ongoing training programme to upskill care and management staff to better care for people. A staff member said, “Godden Lodge are great at encouraging and promoting staff so that they have good opportunities for development. I am very grateful for this.” The registered manager had secured staff training in Prosper, a project working with the local authority to reduce the number of falls, pressure ulcers and urinary tract infections at the service.

Governance systems and processes were in place to monitor the overall safety and quality of the service. Regular audits were undertaken across the service and any trends in people’s care, accidents or incidents were analysed and action taken as appropriate. We noted from records and audits that an analysis of people’s experience and outcomes of social and leisure engagement was not part of the system review of quality and safety. Rota arrangements, training for staff with responsibility for activities and some record keeping needed improvement. This would ensure everyone had equal access and had their needs met. The registered manager had implemented new processes as a result of lessons learnt from accident, incidents, complaints and concerns. These included ensuring a staff member accompanied people with dementia to hospital, more thorough recording when receiving medicines into the service and checks on people at risk of bruising easily. Notifications were consistently submitted to external organisations as required.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.