Forest Lodge Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Care was provided in a way that was mostly caring. However, we did witness an incident that compromised the dignity of a person using the service. Other than that, we saw people were treated with kindness and compassion, and the service promoted people’s independence, choice and control. The provider sought to promote the wellbeing of staff through a positive working culture and various support systems.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People and relatives told us that staff behaved in a kind and compassionate way. A person told us, “I don’t worry because the carers keep me safe and are kind to me. I am free to walk around, no problem.” A relative said, “It’s good the staff interaction, they are kind. Some staff go over and beyond. I am happy with the standard of care [person] gets.”

The Manager told us how they monitored staff practice to ensure people were treated with kindness and compassion. They told us how new staff were inducted alongside more experienced staff as a way of learning the right attitudes which were in line with the organisation’s values. Staff were able to describe the ways in which they would pay particular attention to such things as bathing to ensure people were supported in a dignified way.

For the most part, we observed staff treating people with kindness, compassion and dignity. Staff interacted with people in a kind and caring manner and people were seen to be relaxed and at ease in the company of staff. We observed that staff knocked and waited before entering people’s bedrooms or bathrooms. However, as mentioned elsewhere in the caring section of this report, we observed that a person’s dignity was compromised by wearing ill-fitting trousers which fell down in a communal area of the home.

People and relatives told us people were treated as individuals and that their needs were met. A relative said, “Since [person] came to Forest Lodge they [staff] have met all of [person’s] needs, especially physical health needs very well and they have made a fantastic recovery."

We saw people were treated as individuals through observations. Care plans were person centred, based around the needs of individuals.

Most people and relatives told us independence, choice and control was promoted. A person said, “I can take a bath or shower when I choose.” Another person said, “They let me use my vapes in the garden.” A relative told us, “They get to wear what they want.” Although one person told us, “They decide when it’s time for me to go to bed. It would be nice to choose.”

Staff told us how they prompted people to do as much for themselves as possible to maintain their independence. They told us about many of the day to day tasks that people were involved in which included basic routines such as personal care and dressing to going out into the local community to access a range of public amenities. The staff were able to describe the ways they involved people in making decisions about their day to day care. Staff talked about how they used visual prompts for people, particularly for those who did not use words as their method of communication.

During our visit our observation was mixed. We observed a person who required adjustment to their clothing however this was not undertaken in a timely way and staff needed prompting to respond to this. During mealtimes we saw that staff responded promptly to requests. We received feedback from a relative who told us, “ they have enough food but don’t think choice is enough”. We also saw a group activity being undertaken with several people however received feedback from a relative who said they did not feel their family member was included in activities. People’s care plans did contain information around how to promote their independence. We saw a person who required close supervision and observed this was done in a way that did not restrict their independence.

Processes supported people to have independence, choice and control over their care. For example, care plans included information about what people could do for themselves, and what they needed support with, which helped to promote their independence. The planned menu included a choice for each meal, and if people did not want ether of the choices they were able to have something else, and we saw this during our inspection.

People and relatives told us staff were good at responding to their needs. A person said, “The carers are kind. I’m sure if I was upset, they would notice. I’ve built a relationship with staff which helps. They are respectful, for example, they never come in without knocking on my door first.” A relative said, “To be honest, this is the first place I have peace of mind. It’s good compared to previous places.” [Previous care homes their relative had lived in]. Another relative said, “[Person] was wet sometimes and I told the manager and that has improved.” The same relative added, “They are responsive, the nurses are very responsive.”

The Manager told us about their close working relationship with the GP service for the home. We heard how the GP service responded immediately to people’s needs including a willingness for the GP to see a person immediately on the day of concern. Staff told us how, if they had concerns regarding a person’s health they would talk to either a nurse or their manager who were also qualified nurses.

Staff did not always respond to people’s immediate needs. We saw a person living in the home wearing trousers too large which resulted in them falling down around their knees which happened on three occasions. Despite the Registered Manager instructing staff to get a belt to hold the trousers up, staff failed to do this

The manager told us about the systems in place to support staff. They told us that all staff received regular supervision to discuss their wellbeing and aspects of work for their development. They told us about their debriefing practice following difficult situations to enable staff to feel supported. They told us about the incentives and external support the organisation had to show their appreciation to their workforce. Staff told us that the manager was supportive and was open to everyone working in the home.

Systems were in place to promote workforce wellbeing and enablement. Staff had regular 1:1 supervision which gave them the opportunity to discuss any relevant issues. In addition, staff had an annual appraisal of their strengths and development needs. The provider also had a ‘staff line’ which staff could phone to talk about any worries or concerns they had, they could phone this anonymously if they wished. There was an employee of the month, which was voted for by the staff team, and an organisation employee of the month who won a prize.