Archived: Lightfoot Lodge

Updated 4 December 2015

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

We inspected the service on 6 October 2015. We gave short notice to the provider because the location provides a short stay service and we needed to be sure that someone would be available for our visit. The inspection team consisted of an adult social care inspector.

We spent time at the service looking at records. This included three people’s care and support records, two staff recruitment files and other records relating to the management of the service.

Before our inspection, we reviewed all the information we held about the service. This included looking at any safeguarding referrals received, whether any complaints had been made and any other information from members of the public. Before the inspection we looked at notifications we had received. A notification is information about important events which the service is required to tell us about by law.

We contacted the local authority safeguarding and contracts teams for their views on the service. None of these people had any concerns about this service.

On the day of our inspection we observed staff supporting people who used the service. We spoke with the three people who were staying at the service, one relative, the registered manager and four staff.

Updated 4 December 2015

We inspected this service on 6 October 2015 and gave short notice to the provider prior to our visit. This service was registered with the Care Quality Commission in December 2014 and this was their first inspection.

This respite service is owned by VIVO Care Choices Limited and registered to provide short stay and respite care and support people over the age of 65. The service can accommodate 12 people. The service is situated in Hoole, a suburb of Chester. It is close to local shops. At the time of this visit there were three people staying at the service.

There was a registered manager employed to work at the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. 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 service is run.

People told us staff were patient, kind, and supported them well. A relative said they were happy with the support provided and that the staff were very caring. Comments included “The staff are lovely” and “The staff are very friendly.”

Care plans were person centred and gave good information about the person’s individual needs. They were well written and included a range of risk assessments which were tailored to each person’s needs. Some people were supported with their medications and we saw that safe systems were in place for the storage and administration of medication.

The service was clean and well maintained. Procedures were in place to ensure all appropriate safety checks had been undertaken on the building and equipment used, on a regular basis.

People and relatives said they were safe in the support of the staff. Staff were aware of safeguarding policies and procedures and had undertaken safeguarding awareness training. The registered manager understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and the implications of these on people who used the service. Staff had an awareness of the MCA 2005 and DoLS through the induction process and safeguarding training.

There were robust staff recruitment processes in place which meant that people were protected from staff that were unsuitable to work with people who may be deemed vulnerable. Staff had undertaken an induction process and had access to supervision sessions, staff meetings and training relevant to their job role.

People had access to information about the service that included a statement of purpose and service users guide. These were written in large print and included pictures to make it easier to understand the information provided.

A complaints policy was available and processes were in place should a complaint be received. The registered provider had not received any complaints and CQC had also not received any complaints about this service.

Quality assurance processes were in place which included meetings held with people who used the service and a range of quality audits were also undertaken in relation to the service provided.