Archived: Acacia Lodge Care Home

Updated 26 January 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 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.

This inspection took place on 11 December 2017 and was unannounced.

The inspection was carried out by one inspector and an expert by experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before our inspection, we reviewed information that we held about the service such as notifications. These detail events which happened at the service that the provider is required to tell us about. We also contacted the Local Authority for any information they held on the service.

We spoke with nine people who used the service, three relatives of people that used the service, three support workers, a nurse and the registered manager. We reviewed six peoples care records to ensure they were reflective of their needs, six staff files, and other documents relating to the management of the service.

Updated 26 January 2018

This inspection took place on 11 December 2017 and was unannounced.

Acacia Lodge Care Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Acacia Lodge Care Home is registered to accommodate up to 40 people in one adapted building. At the time of our inspection, 36 people were receiving care.

The service had 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.

Quality monitoring systems and processes were in place, but actions were not always identified and information was not always recorded accurately. Training audits showed that staff training was not up to date, and this was not acted upon quickly by management.

Staff knew about checking the settings on pressure relieving mattresses, but were not recording these checks so we could not be sure when or how often this was taking place .

People told us they felt safe, and staff had an understanding of abuse and the safeguarding procedures that should be followed to report abuse. People had risk assessments in place to cover any risks that were present within their lives, but also enable them to be as independent as possible. All the staff we spoke with were confident that any concerns they raised would be followed up appropriately by their manager.

Staffing levels were adequate to meet people's current needs. The staff recruitment procedures ensured that appropriate pre-employment checks were carried out to ensure only suitable staff worked at the service. References and security checks were carried out as required.

Staff attended induction training where they completed mandatory training courses and were able to shadow more experienced staff giving care. Staff told us that they were able to update their mandatory training with short refresher courses, however records we looked at showed us that several staff were overdue their refresher training.

Staff supported people with the administration of medicines, and were trained to do so. The people we spoke with were happy with the support they received.

Staff were trained in infection control, and told us they had the appropriate personal protective equipment to perform their roles safely. The service was clean and tidy, and regular cleaning took place to ensure the prevention of the spread of infection.

Staff were well supported by the manager and senior team, and had one to one supervisions and observations.

People's consent was gained before any care was provided and the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 were met. Consent forms were signed and within people’s files . People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice.

People were able to choose the food and drink they wanted and staff supported people with this, and people could be supported to access health appointments when necessary. Health professionals were involved with people’s support as and when required.

Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect and spent time getting to know them and their specific needs and wishes. People told us they were happy with the way that staff spoke to them, and provided their care in a respectful and dignified manner.

People were involved in their own care planning and were able to contribute to the way in which they were supported. Care planning was personalised and mentioned people’s likes and dislikes, so that staff understood their needs fully. People told us they felt in control of their care and were listened to by staff.

The service had a complaints procedure in place to ensure that people and their families were able to provide feedback about their care and to help the service make improvements where required. The people we spoke with knew how to use it.

The service worked in partnership with other agencies to ensure quality of care across all levels. Communication was open and honest, and improvements were highlighted and worked upon as required.