Goodson Lodge Care Centre

Updated 10 September 2020

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.

This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place. As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are conducting a thematic review of infection control and prevention measures in care homes.

This inspection took place on 27 August 2020 and was announced. The service was selected to take part in this thematic review which is seeking to identify examples of good practice in infection prevention and control.

Updated 10 September 2020

The inspection took place 8 and 9 May 2018 and was unannounced. This was the first inspection at Goodson Lodge since the service registered with CQC on 19 May 2017.

Goodson Lodge is a purpose-built care home. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Goodson Lodge provides accommodation and personal care for up to 64 people. At the time of our visit, 22 people were using the service. People lived in the two units, on the ground floor of the home.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

Records were not always consistently completed to evidence that people were being kept safe. Some people were assessed as being at risk of absconding or altercation with others and requiring fifteen-minute observations to be completed. There were gaps in records for two people.

Repositioning charts were not consistently completed for people who required support to change position to promote their skin integrity. There were gaps in records for two people.

We made two recommendations regarding the completion of records.

Risks were assessed where identified. Referrals for specialist advice were made in a timely manner. For example, people at risk of falls were risk assessed and referred for mobility aids.

Medicines were managed, stored and administered safely. We saw that records were completed and regularly audited to ensure any mistakes or omissions were promptly identified.

The service was clean and free from odours throughout. People told us their bedrooms were kept “spotlessly clean.”

People told us they felt safe living at the service. Staff were able to identify the types and signs of abuse. Staff knew who and where to report safeguarding concerns.

There were safe recruitment and robust induction processes in place. The service was supported by a recruitment manager. Some staff had not worked in care before, but were recruited based on having the right qualities and values .

Staff were well trained to support people. Staff received a broad range of training and new members of the team completed The Care Certificate as well as shadowing experienced care staff.

We saw kind and caring interactions between people and staff. There was well-received banter and humour where appropriate. Staff also spoke respectfully to people, using their preferred name or title.

People and their relatives were involved in creating the care plans. These were then kept up to date by key workers (specific staff assigned to people). Some people and their relatives told us they didn’t get to see the key worker as often as they would like.

There was an activities programme in place. People spoke positively about the provision of activities at the service. However, some people told us they would like to spend more time outside of the home.

The home was well-designed. The building design and layout had received accreditation from the University of Stirling for being dementia friendly. People were free to spend their time between the two open units of the service.

There were records of compliments and complaints. Complaints were investigated thoroughly and responded to in a timely manner.

The registered manager was proud of the staff team and what they had achieved. They spoke with enthusiasm about how the service will progress. The registered manager had a vision for future developments of the service. They told us there had been challenges in ensuring the team consisted of staff that were on board with their vision. This had led to a turnover in staff since the registered manager joined the service.

The management team were included in the care shift rota’s. This meant the registered manager and deputy manager could get to know people well and support the different staff teams.