Archived: Godden Lodge Care Home

Updated 6 August 2016

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 7, 8 and 9 June 2016 and was unannounced.

The inspection team on day one of the inspection consisted of three inspectors and two Specialist Advisors whose specialist area of expertise related to nursing, pressure ulcer management and End of Life care. On the second day of inspection the inspection team consisted of three inspectors and a specialist pharmacist inspector. On the third day of inspection the inspection team consisted of one inspector.

We reviewed the information we held about the service including safeguarding alerts and other notifications. This refers specifically to incidents, events and changes the provider and manager are required to notify us about by law.

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.

We spoke with 21 people who used the service, 15 relatives, 19 members of staff, four house manager’s, the manager, deputy manager, the Clinical Service Manager and two representatives acting for the registered provider.

We reviewed 25 people’s care plans and care records. We looked at the service’s staff support records for eight members of staff. We also looked at the service’s arrangements for the management of medicines, complaints and compliments information and quality monitoring and audit information.

Updated 6 August 2016

Godden Lodge Residential and Nursing Homes provides accommodation, personal care and nursing care for up to 133 older people. The service consists of four separate houses, Boyce House and Murrelle House for people living with dementia and who have nursing needs, Cephas House for people who require nursing and palliative care and Victoria House for people who require residential care. At the time of this inspection Appleton House remained closed.

Following our inspection to the service in January 2016, a Notice of Proposal and subsequent Notice of Decision was issued to the registered provider advising that no further admissions could be made to the service. In addition, the Care Quality Commission met with the registered provider on 18 January 2016 to discuss our on-going concerns. During the meeting the registered provider’s representatives gave an assurance that things would improve. At this inspection we found that significant improvements had been made.

At our previous inspection of 5, 6 and 7 January 2016, we had identified several areas of concern. We completed this inspection on 7, 8 and 9 June 2016 to see if improvements had been made to the service that people received. There were 81 people living at the service when we inspected.

A registered manager was not in post at the time of the inspection. 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. A new manager was appointed following our last inspection to the service in January 2016. At the time of this inspection they were not yet formally registered with the Care Quality Commission however an application to be registered had been submitted.

At this inspection we found that although some areas required further sustained improvement, the majority of improvements had been accomplished.

Further development of the registered provider’s quality assurance arrangements were required to ensure that these were robust. Record keeping in some areas relating to people who used the service also required reviewing and improvement, particularly where matters had been highlighted as part of care plan audit arrangements. Furthermore improvements were required to ensure that suitable control measures were put in place to mitigate risk or potential risk of harm for people using the service. Information relating to people’s capacity to make day-to-day decisions was conflicting and contradictory.

Improvements were required to ensure that effective arrangements were in place for the management of complaints and to ensure that these were addressed in a timely manner and all elements of the complaint dealt with. Improvements were also still required to ensure that people who predominately remained in bed or in their bedroom received opportunities for social stimulation.

People told us the service was a safe place to live and that there were sufficient staff available to meet their needs. Appropriate arrangements were in place to recruit staff safely so as to ensure they were the right people. Staff were able to demonstrate a good understanding and knowledge of people’s specific support needs, so as to ensure theirs’ and others’ safety. Staff were friendly, kind and caring towards the people they supported and care provided met people’s individual care and support needs. Medicines were safely stored, recorded and administered in line with current guidance to ensure people received their prescribed medicines to meet their needs.

Staff received opportunities for training and this ensured that staff employed at the service had the right skills to meet people’s needs. Staff felt supported and received appropriate formal supervision. Staff demonstrated a good understanding and awareness of how to treat people with respect and dignity. The dining experience for people was positive and people were complimentary about the quality of meals provided.