Latham Lodge Nursing and Residential Care Home

Latham Lodge is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to 40 people, specialising in end of life care and people with long term health conditions. At the time of the inspection 36 people were being supported.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

The provider supported staff in providing effective care for people through person-centred care planning, training and supervision. They ensured the provision of best practice guidance and that supported staff to meet people’s individual needs.

Risks to people were recorded in their care plans and staff demonstrated they had a good knowledge of people.

The home had a consistent staff team who understood the needs of people well. We saw staff upheld and promoted people's rights relating to equality and diversity.

We saw evidence of people’s and relative’s involvement in care assessments. However, people did not always feel involved in the assessments and reviews.

People were encouraged to maintain a healthy, balanced diet, based on their individual needs and had access to food and drink whenever they wanted.

People and their relatives were positive about the quality of care and support people received.

Staff respected people's privacy and dignity.

Staff identified what was important to people and endeavoured to provide meaningful experiences and lasting happy memories.

Latham Lodge offered bespoke care and support for people at end stage of life (EOL) and to their families.

Relatives and staff told us they thought the home was well led and spoke positively about the registered manager. The provider and registered manager carried out numerous audits to ensure the service was effective.

The manager was proactive in ensuring they had a visible presence within the home and operated an open door policy ensuring that any low-level concerns were dealt with promptly preventing escalation.

The service was well-led by a management team whose passion and drive to deliver a good service, leading by example, was evident.

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 Good (7 December 2016).

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.

The inspection was unannounced and was carried out on 7 and 9 September 2016.

There was a registered manager in place at the home. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the home. 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 home is run.

People told us they felt the home was safe. Staff had received safeguarding training and were able to demonstrate an understanding of the provider’s safeguarding policy and explain the action they would take if they identified any concerns.

The risks relating to people’s health and welfare were assessed and these were recorded along with actions identified to reduce those risks in the least restrictive way. They were personalised and provided sufficient information to allow staff to protect people whilst promoting their independence.

People were supported by staff who had received an induction into the home and appropriate training, professional development and supervision to enable them to meet people’s individual needs. There were enough staff to respond to and meet people’s needs.

There were suitable systems in place to ensure the safe storage and administration of medicines. Medicines were administered by staff who had received appropriate training and assessments. People were supported to access healthcare services when they needed them.

Staff followed legislation designed to protect people’s rights and ensure decisions were the least restrictive and made in their best interests.

Staff developed caring and positive relationships with people, were sensitive to their individual choices and treated them with dignity and respect.

People were supported to have enough to eat and drink. Mealtimes were a social event and staff supported people in a patient and friendly manner.

The service was responsive to people’s needs and staff listened to what people said. Staff were prompt to raise issues about people’s health and people were referred to health professionals when needed. People were confident they could raise concerns or complaints and that these would be dealt with.

People and, when appropriate, their families or other representatives were involved in discussions about their care planning. People were encouraged to provide feedback on the service provided both informally and through an annual questionnaire.

Staff felt supported by the management team to raise any issues or concerns. The quality of the care and treatment people experienced was monitored and action taken to promote people's safety and welfare. Accidents and incidents were monitored, analysed and remedial actions identified to reduce the risk of reoccurrence.

We also spoke with three relatives of people who used the service. The relatives told us they were very happy with the care provided. They said they were kept informed about any changes to their relatives care and treatment. Relatives knew how to raise concerns and felt their concerns were acted on swiftly. They also told us there was plenty of staff on duty when they visited and the home was very clean and well maintained.

We found medication was administered safely to people. People were given appropriate support where required, to ensure they had taken their medication. Staff received appropriate support and training to ensure they were able to meet the needs of people living at the home.

We found that care plans had detailed pre admission assessments, and information about individuals’ communication needs, personal hygiene, continence, nutrition, medication and mobility needs. Care plans included details of people's life histories, family details, and likes and dislikes.

We spoke to the General Practitioner during their visit who told us that the home was "brilliant" and that they "I would be quite happy to have one of my relatives to stay here".

People using the service were protected from abuse as they were supported by a staff team who had appropriate knowledge and training on safeguarding adults. Staff told us if they had any concerns they would report them to the manager.

Staff we spoke to and records we reviewed, demonstrated that staff were suitably experienced and skilled to support people living in the home, although on the day of our visit there was insufficient staff on duty to fully meet the needs of the people in a timely manner.

The provider had an effective system for monitoring and assessing the quality of the service which regularly took into account the view of people that live in the home and their relatives.