The Warren Residential Lodge

Updated 6 October 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 21 and 24 August 2018 and was unannounced. On the first day of the inspection there was 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. On the second day of the inspection, there was one inspector.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and any improvements they plan to make. We reviewed the information in the PIR, along with other records we held about the service including previous inspection reports and notifications. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell the Care Quality Commission about by law.

We spoke with 12 people living at The Warren Residential Lodge, four relatives and four visiting health professionals. We also spoke with the provider, the registered manager, the deputy manager, the medicines manager, six care staff, a kitchen assistant and one domestic assistant. We looked at care plans and associated records for five people, staff duty records, staff recruitment files for six staff, policies and procedures and quality assurance records. We also spent time observing the care and support people received in communal areas of the service. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

The home was last inspected in July 2017 when it was rated as ‘Requires Improvement’ overall with a breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 relating to Good Governance.

Updated 6 October 2018

The inspection took place on 21 and 24 August 2018 and was unannounced.

The Warren Residential Lodge 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.

The Warren Residential Lodge is registered to provide accommodation for up to 31 people, including people living with dementia care needs. At the time of our inspection, there were 29 people living at the service. The service was arranged over one level, which was divided into different ‘zones’. Five bedrooms had en-suite facilities and there were four communal bathrooms in addition to three toilets. There were two lounges, one dining room and a garden area that people could easily access.

There was a registered manager 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.

The home was last inspected in July 2017 when it was rated as ‘Requires Improvement’ overall with a breach of Regulation 17 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 relating to Good Governance. At this inspection we found that appropriate actions had been taken and therefore the service was no longer in breach of this regulation.

People felt safe living at The Warren Residential Lodge. Staff knew how to keep people safe and how to identify, prevent and report abuse. They engaged appropriately with the local safeguarding authority.

Individual and environmental risks to people were managed effectively. Risk assessments identified risks to people and provided clear guidance to staff on how risks should be managed and mitigated.

There were appropriate arrangements in place for the safe handling, storage and disposal of medicines.

Recruitment procedures were in place to ensure that suitable staff were employed by the service.

People received care and support from staff who were suitably qualified, skilled and knowledgeable to carry out their roles effectively.

New staff completed a comprehensive induction programme and all staff were suitably supported in their roles.

People praised the standard of care delivered and the quality of the meals. Dietary needs were met and people received appropriate support to eat and drink. People were supported to access healthcare services when needed and to attend hospital appointments.

People were cared for with kindness and compassion. Staff interacted with them in a positive way. They spoke about people warmly and demonstrated a detailed knowledge of them as individuals.

People were cared for with dignity and respect and were treated in a kind and caring way by staff. Staff know people well, encouraged people to remain as independent as possible and involved them in decisions about their care.

Staff protected people's privacy and responded promptly when people's needs or preferences changed. They involved people in the care planning process and kept family members up to date with any changes to their relative's needs.

People received personalised care and support that met their needs. Care plans provided staff with detailed information about how they should support people in an individualised way.

People had the opportunity to access to a range of suitable activities. There was an appropriate complaints procedure in place and people knew how to make a complaint.

People and their families felt the home was run well. The provider was actively involved in running the service and there was a clear management structure in place.

Staff were happy in their work and felt supported by the provider and the manager.

There was an open and transparent culture in the home. Relatives could visit at any time and were made welcome.

There was an appropriate quality assurance system in place and where issues were identified, action had been taken promptly.