Clipstone Hall & Lodge

Ratings

• Overall

  Good

• Safe

  Requires improvement

• Effective

  Good

• Caring

  Good

• Responsive

  Good

• Well-led

  Good

Our view of the service

Clipstone Hall and Lodge is a ‘care home’ providing personal care and support to older people and younger adults and people living with dementia. Clipstone Hall and Lodge was last rated Requires Improvement (published 14 October 2022). The report was published following CQC’s old inspection approach using key lines of enquiry (KLOEs), prompts and ratings characteristics. This assessment has been completed following the Care Quality Commission (CQC) new approach to assessment; Single Assessment Framework (SAF). We carried out our on-site assessment on 6 and 7 February 2024. This was an unannounced assessment, which means the provider was not told an assessment was going to be starting beforehand. During this assessment we looked at 8 quality statements; Learning culture; Involving people to manage risks; Safe and effective staffing; Responding to people’s immediate needs; Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders; Governance, management and sustainability; Freedom to speak up; and Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion. We assessed some but not all quality statements at this visit which means we use the ratings from the previous inspection to rate the key questions of safe, caring and well-led. We have not assessed any quality statements under effective and responsive, so the rating judgement for this has not changed since our last inspection.

People's experience of this service

Some people told us they were not always supported by enough trained and competent staff and at times this impacted the care they received and the frequency of their support to manage identified risks. However, everyone we spoke with stated they were confident there was enough staff to assist them in an emergency and they felt safe living at the home. We observed people in unsupervised communal areas who required support. People did not have access to call bells in these areas and had to wait for staff to have their needs met. People said staff were kind and compassionate. However, activities were lacking and needed more variation. People were aware there was ongoing recruitment for an activities co-ordinator. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People seemed comfortable and relaxed with staff and staff engaged with them in a caring and warm manner. People's engagement with staff indicated that they had developed trusting relationships with them. We observed staff engaging well with residents. People told us they knew how to raise their concerns and were confident the registered manager would respond to address any issues they raised.