The Lodge Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

People received care and support that was personalised and responsive to their individual needs and took full account of their background history and personal circumstances. Staff had a good understanding of people’s needs and preferences. The provider was committed to challenging any form of discrimination it encountered. People were able to express their views about the care they received and were given the opportunity to regularly review their care plan if any changes needed to be made.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

At the last inspection we found care was not always planned in a personalised way for people in the home to meet their needs and preferences. People were not being supported to achieve good outcomes. At this inspection we found people were at the centre of the service provided. Care plans showed the person and/or their relatives had full involvement. People’s care plans had appropriate information about their preferences for their support and contained guidance for staff on how to support people safely. This helped to ensure staff had the information they needed to meet people's needs.

The manager told us how they involved people with their care planning and that staff received training around person centred care. For example, one staff member told us that they worked with one person to ensure that the care plan was easy for them to understand what was written in their plan. They also supported the person to add background information that was not given before the person moved in, this included information when the person was younger and the things they liked to do.

We saw positive interactions between people using the service and the staff supporting them. However, we noted that people were sitting in rows around the lounge room and in one case in rows in the middle of the room. The environment was not conducive for people to communicate with one another. We noted that by having a large number of people seated in the lounge there was nowhere for anyone else to sit and engage in conversation with a person without having to crouch down to do so. In addition, we saw some people drinking cups of tea, however, owing to the lack of space there was nowhere to put the cup down once the person had finished.

We saw during our visit a care provision that was adequate in providing care for people to keep them safe and to meet their care needs. A staff member told us they were facilitating a game of ‘connect 4’. A game of matching colours. However, this was limited to a very small amount of people.

We spoke with the provider about what they offered. They told us, anyone moving into the home were provided with basic furniture for their room and that people were welcomed to bring in as many personal possessions to give their rooms a homely feel. The provider said it was their intention for people to see their room’s as being very identifiable to the individual’s tastes.

We spoke with a district nurse who visited the home, they told us, “The Lodge and my team have a wonderful relationship with the overall care home GP. They are quick to reply back to emails and listen to our advice and suggestions. The care home is also very welcoming to our diabetes, continence and equipment company team for instance. Overall, The Lodge has come a long way since the new management has taken over. There will always be something to improve, however, slowly, I feel they are getting there.”

During our visit we spoke with the home’s GP, they told us about how the home had joined a scheme which enabled access to their own GP services 24 hours a day and at weekends which gave them access to a medical professional who knew the home and the people well.

We noted that the home had a menu plan offering different choices at each mealtime. The information was written, in English and there were limited pictures. However, the chef said they were working towards producing a pictorial menu. They also helped people to choose on a one to basis.

The manager told us how they tried to make information as easy read as possible as this helped people that struggle with written information, for example, using pictorial posters and written words helped people process information easier. This also included information on people’s care plans.

We noted the provider had recently started families’ meetings, holding the same meeting times within a day to enable people to attend. We saw minutes of these meetings, and these were made available to those unable to attend to inform them of what was discussed which would enable them to contribute.

The provider periodically carried out satisfaction surveys, asking families of the people who use the service about the quality of all round care they receive. The survey asked opinions on how people were cared for, staff support and the attitudes of staff. It included satisfaction on the quality of food and activities in the home. We saw 88% positive feedback on attitudes by staff. We noted that 76% of people were satisfied with the food and that 64% disagreed with being satisfied with activities in the home. We noted that the feedback report dated March 2024 also included an action plan which included the need for more social activities, more garden furniture and raised flower beds amongst other things.

Staff told us they were very happy with the service. The manager operated an ‘open door’ policy and was in regular contact with people, relatives and staff to ensure the service ran smoothly.

We noted that the provider had a number of ways of seeking feedback from a range of sources, this included the relatives of people they support and the staff team.

The staff told us that owing to changing needs some people occasionally required additional support on a one-to-one basis in order to keep them safe. The provider said that this was negotiated with the local authority and agreed when required. During our visit to the home, we saw that the building was purpose built and fully accessible. There was an upper floor which was accessible for people via a lift. The provider told us people were free to go up and down in the lift as they wished and that doing so posed no risk to people who did wish to use it.

The manager told us it was important that people were respected and treated equally regardless of their abilities, lifestyle and beliefs. For example, we saw that the lift was available for people that could use it independently and there were no restrictions to stop people using the lift if they were able to.

As part of the visit to the Lodge care home we heard about the access people had to medical treatment which they had 7 days a week. Any concerns staff had, were responded to by a GP who knew the home, with a good working relationship with the staff team who were providing the support.

We saw the provider made efforts for people to have the access to care they required to maintain their health. The provider told us of health initiatives they were involved in, particularly with their GP that promoted the health and wellbeing of people.

In our conversations with the home’s head chef and the manager, they told us how they were able to cater for the dietary needs of all the people living in the home. They mentioned about the range of requirements they met including gluten free, vegetarians, pescatarians and those needing to eat halal meat. They said that as each person’s birthday came around, they were given a choice of what they wanted the kitchen staff to cook which included a dessert of their choice.

Staff told us how they celebrate people’s birthdays and other special events. A staff member said they arrange for the kitchen staff to make them a birthday party this included cake food that they enjoy. Relatives were also invited who chose to attend. The manager said that they ensured that people received the right outcomes that was individual to them and not done as it suited the home.

We noted the provider worked with other partner agencies to break down barriers that prevented access to care and support. The management team told us of the work they had done in accessing services to date in the year they had managed the care home and they mentioned about their intentions in the future, particularly around dementia support.

The provider said that the home had in recent months provided support around end-of-life care. We saw through the care planning process that when required, plans were implemented to ensure people received the right care and that their wishes were adhered to as they reached the end of their lives.

During our visit the provider told us that there was currently no one receiving end of life care.

We noted in reviewing care files there were a number of people who had a notice of not to attempt resuscitation if the person went into cardiac arrest. This was agreed by health professionals, usually a GP, family members and where possible the person themselves owing to their own frailty.