Archived: Cedar Lawn

Updated 24 August 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked 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.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 1 August 2018 and was unannounced. The inspection was undertaken by two inspectors, an assistant inspector and an expert by experience. The expert by experience was a person who had personal experience of caring for someone who had similar care needs.

Prior to our inspection visit, we reviewed the information we held about the service. We looked at information received from the local authority commissioners and the statutory notifications the registered manager had sent us. A statutory notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send to us by law. Commissioners are people who work to find appropriate care and support services which are paid for by the local authority. The commissioners did not share any concerns about the service.

Before the inspection visit, the provider completed a Provider Information Collection (PIC). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. The PIC was very detailed and we were able to review the information in the PIC during our inspection visit. We found the information in the PIC was an accurate assessment of how the service operated.

During our inspection we spoke with the registered manager about their management of the home. We spoke with two senior care staff, two care staff, the activity co-ordinators and seven non-care staff about what it was like to work at Cedar Lawn.

During the inspection we spoke with six people who lived at the home and two relatives/visitors. We observed care and support being delivered in communal areas and we observed how people were supported to eat and drink at lunch time.

We reviewed four people’s care plans and daily records to see how their care and treatment was planned and delivered. We looked at staff training records, records of complaints and reviewed the checks the registered manager and provider made to assure themselves people received a quality service.

Updated 24 August 2018

We inspected this service on 1 August 2018. The inspection was unannounced.

The service provides accommodation and personal care for up to 37 older people. People in care homes receive accommodation and 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. The accommodation is over two floors and 29 people were living at the home on the day of our inspection.

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.

At our previous inspection in February 2016, we rated the service as Outstanding in the key areas of caring and well-led. At this inspection we found people continued to receive a high standard of care. However, significant changes in the staff team had caused challenges over the last 12 months which meant the overall rating of the service has now changed to Good.

There were enough staff to meet people's needs safely and respond to their requests for assistance. The provider's recruitment procedures ensured staff were of a suitable character to work with people who lived in the home. People’s care plans included an assessment of their needs and identified the individual risks to their safety. Staff understood their responsibility to work in a safe way and report any concerns to the registered manager.

People were cared for by kind and compassionate staff, who knew people's individual preferences and how they wanted their care provided. Staff understood people's risks and abilities and received updated information at shift handovers to ensure the care they provided was responsive to any changes in people's needs. Staff received regular training and support to ensure the support people received was effective and safe.

People were supported to maintain a nutritionally balanced diet. People’s medical conditions were explained in their care plans and staff worked in partnership with other healthcare professionals to ensure people’s medical and health needs continued to be met and responded to. People's medicines were managed, stored and administered safely in line with GP and pharmacist prescription instructions.

The registered manager and staff understood their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act 2005. They told us everyone who lived at the home had the capacity to express their wishes, which ensured they received effective support with no restrictions on their liberty.

People's equality, diversity and human rights were respected because one of the provider’s values was, “We treat every person as a unique individual.” Staff promoted people's dignity and respected their privacy. People were offered opportunities to engage in activities and conversations that met their physical, social and spiritual needs.

The home was adapted, decorated and furnished to meet people's needs. Staff had training in infection prevention and control and understood the importance of maintaining a clean environment.

Staff enjoyed their job because they were part of a supportive staff team who communicated and worked well together. Staff respected the registered manager’s leadership and described senior staff as visible and approachable. Systems were in place for the provider and registered manager to assess and monitor the quality of the service and respond to people's feedback. People were happy with the quality of care they received.