Cameron Lodge

Updated 14 August 2019

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Service and service type

Cameron Lodge 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.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought feedback from the local authority and professionals who work with the service. We used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return. This is information providers are required to send us with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with six people who used the service and two visiting healthcare professionals about their experience of the care provided. We observed staff interactions with people and observed care and support in communal areas. 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 five members of staff including the registered and deputy managers, and three care staff.

We reviewed a range of records. This included four people’s care records, which included care plans, risk assessments, daily care records and medicines records. We looked at four staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service, including a sample of audits, health and safety checks, accidents and policies and procedures.

Updated 14 August 2019

About the service:

Cameron Lodge is a ‘care home’ and is registered to provide accommodation and personal care for a maximum of 12 people. The accommodation is a house and two bungalows on the same site, with each one having separate and adapted facilities.

At the time of the inspection, four people lived in the house and three people lived in each bungalow. Although in total 10 people used the service, only seven people received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided. People using the service had a range of conditions including learning and physical disabilities, some people also had mental health needs.

The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensured that people who used the service could live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that included control, choice and independence. People using the service received planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that was appropriate and inclusive for them.

People’s experience of using this service:

People were treated with kindness, respect and compassion. Staff listened to people, answered questions and took interest in what people were saying. People were supported to express their views and, where possible, were actively involved in making decisions about their care and support. People's privacy, dignity and independence were respected and promoted. One person told us, “I am supported well by the staff.”

Medicines were stored and managed safely. There were policies and procedures in place for safe administration of medicines. People received their medicines when they needed them from staff who had been trained and competency checked.

People were protected from abuse. Staff had received regular safeguarding training. They knew how to identify potential signs of abuse and how to report any concerns. Risks associated with people’s care had been identified and full risk assessments were in place. Risks to people and the environment were also assessed and minimised.

Staff were knowledgeable about the Mental Capacity Act 2005. They knew to seek consent for care and knew the process to help those who lacked capacity to make decisions. People’s needs were met by the adaptation and design of the service. The service was clean and staff correctly observed infection control and prevention measures.

People had developed good relationships with staff, they were knowledgeable about people’s support needs, as well as their likes, dislikes and interests. Staff were responsive to changes in people's health needs. People had access to GP’s and specialist healthcare services. Their health and wellbeing was supported by prompt referrals and access to medical care if they became unwell.

The registered manager recruited staff with relevant experience and aptitude to work with people. New staff were given an induction and all staff received on-going training. There were enough staff to keep people safe and meet their needs.

People felt included in planning their care. People were supported to live the lifestyle of their choice, culture and religion were actively considered and supported. People told us they felt listened to by staff. People’s needs were assessed, and their care was delivered in line with current legislation. Some people were supported by advocates and relevant person representatives. These are independent supporters who ensure people’s wishes are known and accommodated.

People received a service that met individual needs and helped them to achieve their goals and ambitions. People were encouraged to be as independent as possible. One person told us, “I have a job here that I am paid to do.”

People enjoyed the food provided, staff supported people to maintain a balanced diet, monitored their nutritional health and, where needed, supported people to eat safely.

Accidents and incidents were reported by staff in line with the provider’s policy. The registered manager took steps to ensure that lessons were learned when things went wrong, there was a very low accident and incident rate.

People told us they would feel comfortable about raising any complaints with staff and the registered manager. People said the registered manager and staff were approachable and supportive.

The provider, registered manager and staff had a clear vision for the service. The provider and registered manager monitored the service in to ensure they continued to provide a good quality service that maintained people’s safety. People, relatives and visitors were asked for feedback about the service they received.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection:

The last rating for this service was Requires Improvement (published 13 July 2018), when there were two breaches of regulation. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.