The inspection was carried out by an inspector who gathered evidence to help us answer our five questions; Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service caring? Is the service responsive to people's needs? Is the service well-led?Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, the staff supporting them and from looking at records.
The detailed evidence supporting our summary please can be read in our full report.
Is the service safe?
Records confirmed that people's needs had been assessed before they were admitted to Lomack House. After admission to the home we found that people's needs were reassessed on a regular basis, to ensure they received the safe care they needed. Staff told us that this meant that staff had the information they needed to minimize identified risks to people.
We found that the provider had provided people with premises that were well maintained. We found effective maintenance systems and processes in place. This meant that people were cared for in an environment that was fit for purpose and safe for the people who lived there.
We saw evidence that staff had been trained in Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), the Mental Capacity Act 2005, and safeguarding of vulnerable adults. We found that people's mental capacity was assessed and best interest meetings, when appropriate, were held according to legal requirements. We found that associated risk assessments, with clear guidelines were in place, to ensure people remained safe and free from harm.
Care Quality Commission (CQC) monitors the operation of (DoLS) which applies to care homes. We spoke with the registered manager who demonstrated her knowledge of the procedures to follow. We saw evidence that applications had been submitted following correct procedures and proper policies relating to DoLS were in place.
Is the service effective?
People told us they were very happy with the care that they received. One person told us they were going on holiday and we found evidence to confirm this within care records and meeting minutes. Another person said, 'I always have lots to do, I am starting a new course in September at college and am looking forward to this.' We found that the delivery of care was in line with people's care plans and assessed needs.
We spoke with staff and observed some positive engagement with people. It was evident within our conversations that staff had a robust knowledge of each person's care needs and preferences.
On the day of our inspection, one person told staff that they had toothache. Staff responded to this and contacted the dental surgery, arranging an appointment for later that day. This demonstrated that the service responded in a timely manner to requests for additional health input.
Is the service caring?
We observed that staff were able to communicate effectively with people who had limited verbal communication and to meet their needs with respect and dignity.
We found that people who lived in Lomack House were supported by friendly, respectful and attentive staff. We observed staff interacting with people who used the service and noted how staff provided encouragement, reassurance and practical help, which promoted independence.
We saw that people had a choice of menu option and that if they chose not to have what was on offer, that staff would help them to find something they would enjoy. One person said, 'The food is ok here, we get to do some cooking and have a choice.'
Is the service responsive to people's needs?
Records showed that people's needs had been assessed before they moved into the home and their support plans were reviewed regularly to reflect any change in their needs. We saw that people's records included people's history, wishes and preferences and goals to be achieved. People and/or their representatives were involved with reviews of care plans and were kept informed of any changes. People had access to daily activities that included trips out, life skills (including laundry, cleaning and cooking) and holidays.
We saw that care plans and risk assessments had been updated when people's needs had changed, and that referrals had been made to other health and social care professionals when required. The service took account of individual preferences, and supported people to access a variety of activities.
Is the service well-led?
There was a registered manager in post on the day of our inspection that had support from a wide range of staff. This meant that the support systems in place facilitated staff to provide an effective level of care for people.
We found comprehensive policies and procedures that addressed every aspect of the service were in place. The registered manager operated a system of quality assurance and completed audits to identify how to improve the service. People and their relatives or representatives were consulted about how the service was run and annual survey questionnaires were sent and the results scrutinised so that actions could be taken to drive future improvement.