Archived: Brentwood Lodge

During the inspection five key questions were answered; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what we observed, the records we looked at and what people who used the service, their relatives and the staff told us.

If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

Some people told us that they felt safe. Safeguarding procedures were robust and staff understood how to safeguard the people they supported. One person told us, 'I feel very safe here. I have my own room and feel very safe here.' Another person told us, 'There aren't any problems here. If I had any concerns I would tell the staff.'

The Care Quality Ccommission monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. The deputy manager understood the home's responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The deputy manager told us there had been no applications. Following a recent court ruling regarding DoLS in care settings, the provider may wish to review people's living arrangements to check whether their circumstances may ammount to a deprivation of liberty, according to the revised definition.

We saw that the service was safe, clean and hygienic. The home had an effective infection control system. Equipment was well maintained and serviced regularly, preventing any unnecessary risks. All the staff told us how they worked to prevent infection and told us how they would manage an outbreak at the home so that the risk of any infection spreading could be reduced.

Is the service effective?

One person told us, 'I haven't had a fall since I came here, whereas I had them at home. The staff have helped me to recover my health.' Another person told us, 'I like to stay as independent as I can. I do as much as I can each day and the staff help me.'

People explained how their care and welfare needs were met. All the people we spoke with told us that they had support with health appointments and felt that the service was flexible. One person told us, 'The staff are very fair here. If I have any problems I just ask. There is always someone to give you a hand.' Another person told us, 'We have plenty of choice about activities. I like to play darts and the staff help me.' One other person told us, 'It's been absolutely fine here. I can press my buzzer when I want to get up or when I want something and the staff will come.'

Is the service caring?

We saw that staff communicated well with people and were able to explain things in a way that could be easily understood. We saw that they did not rush people in the home and we saw interactions were caring. All the relatives we spoke with said they felt the care was very good. One relative told us, 'The staff are so lovely. I couldn't praise them enough.' Another told us, 'The staff are fantastic and I am happy with the care my relative receives.'

We saw that people were treated with respect and dignity by the staff. People were given choice in their care and all the relatives we spoke to told us they were very happy with the care. All the people we spoke with also told us that they were happy with the care and support they received.

Is the service responsive?

All the people we spoke with told us they were very happy with the service. One told us, 'If you are not well there are always staff on hand to help.' A relative told us, 'I can't fault it here. They always provide my relative with choices and involve them in things at the home'.

We saw that staff responded to people's requests for help in a timely way.

Some of the people we spoke with told us they were involved in decisions about their care. They told us that the staff were flexible and responded to their requests at times they had asked, for instance in their rooms when they had pressed the buzzer for assistance or personal care tasks.

We saw that there was a complaints policy at the home. People told us they found the registered manager very approachable and would not hesitate to raise any issues or complain.

People's care needs had been reviewed at least every month. When people's requirements had changed the provider had responded and reviewed their care needs so they could meet their changed support requirements.

People's preferences, interests, aspirations and diverse needs had been recorded and care and support had been provided in accordance with people's wishes.

Is the service well-led?

We spoke with the deputy manager. They showed us there was an effective system to regularly assess the quality of service that people received. We found the views and opinions of people using the service and their carers, family and relatives were also regularly recorded. The manager showed us that activities had been arranged in response to the views and opinions they had received.

The home had systems in place to make sure that managers and staff learnt from any accidents, complaints, whistleblowing or investigations. This reduced the risk to people and helped the service to continually improve.

Staff also told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the service and quality assurance processes were in place. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality care service at all times.

At this inspection we checked on what improvements had been made. During the inspection we spoke to some people who used the service. They were all satisfied with the care and support they were receiving. One person said "We all get well looked after, it's very nice." Another said "I am warm and comfortable; I like it here, the staff look after me very well." We saw that people were being supported and cared for. Staff showed understanding and kindness towards the people they were supporting and caring for.

We looked at two peoples care plans and random sampled other documents and records associated with peoples care and support, such as risk assessments and accident logs. We saw the records had been updated and were reviewed regularly and fully documented people's care and support requirements.

At the end of this inspection we were satisfied that people's identified care and welfare needs were being fully met, and the completed care records and associated documentation that the service maintained supported this.

During the inspection we identified some shortfalls in the way in which some people were cared for. We also found that the recording of people's care was poor. We have asked the manager and provider to make improvements in both of these areas, to ensure people are looked after safely, their care is documented fully and updated regularly. We have also asked for systems to be in place to ensure that people receive a consistent level of care.