Weaver Lodge

Updated 27 April 2022

Weaver Lodge provides services for male and female patients with mental health needs who required rehabilitation. It is managed by the Alternative Futures Group which is a registered charity who have a number of other mental health hospital and community services within the north west of England.

Weaver Lodge is a 20-bed ward and provides rehabilitation to both patients detained under the Mental Health Act and informal patients.

There is a registered manager, accountable officer and nominated individual for this location.

The service is registered to provide the following regulated activities:

• assessment or medical treatment for persons detained under the Mental Health Act 1983,
• treatment of disease, disorder and injury, and
• diagnostic and screening procedures.

The local clinical commissioning group block purchases 14 of the 20 beds. Any referrals from outside the local area would be funded by the patient’s local clinical commissioning group.

Weaver Lodge has been registered with CQC since December 2010.

There have been seven previous inspections at Weaver Lodge, the most recent being March 2019.

On that inspection, we rated Weaver Lodge requires improvement overall and across two of the five key questions we asked (whether services are safe and effective); the other key question were rated as good (caring, responsive and well-led). We issued two requirement notices breaches

• regulation 10 – Dignity and Privacy due to the lack of a female only lounge
• regulation 9 – Person-Centred care due to the lack of appropriate clinical psychology input.

The provider submitted an action plan which told us what they intended to do in order to make improvements. On this inspection, we also checked to see if these improvements had been made. We found that the provider had met these.

Staff were ensuring that ratings were displayed in a prominent place as required. The provider has a duty to ensure the ratings we give are displayed appropriately so patients, visitors and the public can easily see the hospital’s ratings. On this inspection, we found that the current ratings were displayed on the provider’s website. The current ratings were also displayed near the hospital’s reception area.

What people who use the service say

We spoke with five patients who used the service and two relatives. Most patients were complimentary about the standards of care and about staff that provided the care and treatment. Patients told us that staff were always available to talk to. Patients reported that staff were very nice, kind, helpful and friendly. Where patients reported less positive feedback, it was often in the context of not wanting to be detained or in a rehabilitation hospital.

We spoke with two relatives. Family members were positive about the quality of care their loved ones received at Weaver Lodge. Family members told us that staff were caring, approachable and polite. They told us they received regular updates and staff were happy to talk to them. The only exception was where patients had refused permission to pass on information about their progress to relatives.

Updated 27 April 2022

Our rating of this location improved. We rated it as good because:

• The service provided safe care. The ward environment was safe and clean. There were some nurse and support work staff vacancies, but managers were trying to fill these posts and deployed agency and bank staff to cover the shortfalls. Staff assessed and managed risk well. They minimised the use of restrictive practices, stored medicines safely and followed good practice with respect to safeguarding. Staff now made sure that women patients had access to a room which was designated as women only.
• Staff developed holistic, recovery-oriented care plans informed by a comprehensive assessment. They provided a range of treatments suitable to the needs of the patients cared for in a mental health rehabilitation ward and in line with national guidance about best practice.
• The ward team included or had access to a range of specialists required to meet the needs of patients. Staff now screened patients for any psychological needs and, when patients needed psychological input, this was provided. Managers ensured that these staff received training, supervision and appraisal. The ward staff worked well together as a multidisciplinary team and with those outside the ward who would have a role in providing aftercare.
• Staff treated patients with compassion and kindness, respected their privacy and dignity, and understood the individual needs of patients. They actively involved patients and families and carers in care decisions.
• Staff planned and managed discharge well and liaised well with services that would provide aftercare. As a result, discharge was rarely delayed for other than a clinical reason.
• The service worked to a recognised model of mental health rehabilitation. It was well led, and the governance processes ensured that ward procedures ran smoothly.

However:

• Although staff engaged in clinical audit and most audits were completed to a good standard, a small number of audits had not been fully completed and did not always clearly record what action had been taken to show that shortfalls had been fully addressed. Managers had recently introduced a new system to better record evidence that actions had been completed following audits, but this was not fully embedded.
• Although staff understood their roles and responsibilities under the Mental Health Act 1983 and the Mental Capacity Act 2005, there were a small number of shortfalls relating to the Mental Health Act. Mental Health Act administration was provided by a nearby NHS Trust who had picked up these errors and shared responsibility for these shortfalls.
• While there were good mental capacity assessments, best interest considerations for certain decisions about patients who lacked capacity were not always fully recorded on the provider’s own recording systems. It was clear that these decisions were in patient’s best interests through looking at other records.
• Some staff felt that a recently introduced rota system did not fully work to enable a good work/life balance.

Updated 27 April 2022

Our rating of this service improved. We rated it as good. See the summary above for details