Edendale Lodge

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

The home had a welcoming, friendly and caring atmosphere. The staff knew people very well and were kind and cheerful with people. We saw some lovely interactions where staff were reassuring and used their knowledge of people’s interests and things they liked to distract them when upset. Staff promoted people’s independence and offered choice. People would benefit from additional dementia friendly tools to support their decision making and understanding of what choices are available, for example through pictures and images. Staff felt well supported by the registered manager and the provider, and they treated each other kindly and worked together well as a team.

This service scored 70 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We received many examples of positive feedback about staff kindness. We heard examples of where staff had been very thoughtful about how they could make a difference to people. One family member told us a very special birthday celebration had been arranged for their relative for their 100th birthday and the person’s extended family welcomed in to take part. Other comments about staff were, “Absolutely fabulous”, “The staff are superb – they give [relative] lots of attention.”

Staff told us, “It is a caring environment. The team is good and I think it’s an excellent home.” Staff said that they use “About Me” forms which record information about people and their interests, background, occupation, hobbies and preferences.

Health professionals told us that staff know people well and are caring and kind. One said, “When I visit, they [staff] are professional and polite.” Another comment made was, “They are quick to ring if they suspect a resident is unwell – I think they are well trained.” There was one negative comment about a member of staff who can be less helpful if challenged or asked a question they are unsure of. This comment was discussed with the registered manager who confirmed that this would be discussed at supervision.

We observed staff showing concern and compassion for people they were supporting. We saw one person who was very tearful, walking with and holding the arm of a staff member who was comforting and offering reassurance kindly. Staff were thoughtful and kind when helping people get seated for lunch, and ensured their clothing was rearranged as they moved or got up, in order to protect their dignity. We saw staff noticing a person was tapping their foot anxiously and went over to them and gave them a cuddle. The person immediately relaxed and smiled again. Staff knelt beside people when chatting so they had good eye contact and could be heard easily.

Some people were unable to tell us their experience. One person told us, “They treat me well here – they never try to change me.” One relative said about their family member, “She always looks beautifully cared for.”

Staff told us how they get as much information as they can from families to get to know them well. One staff said, “No two people are the same, everyone has their distinctive behaviour. We respect their choices.” One staff member told us of a person that they discovered used to make wedding cakes, and how they arranged some baking sessions where the person could get involved. Staff said people were taken on outings according to their interests, and by asking them where they would like to go. They had been to a garden centre recently and a café. Pub for lunch. One staff said, “They just love the simple things, like having an ice-cream out, feeding the ducks, and watching children play at the park."

We saw that staff knew people and their life histories very well, and understood their likes and dislikes. One staff was seen painting with a person, and said to them, “Shall we do this bit pink – you love pink, don’t you?” The lady smiled and they painted together. Another staff member began singing a song which was familiar to people and they joined in. One staff said to a person upset, “I know what will cheer you up – a diet coke.” The person nodded and smiled. The staff member said, “Yes – I knew it.”

Care plans were specific to each person and there were policies that put people at the centre of their care and treated them as individuals. People’s electronic care plans were up to date, personalised and contained detailed information about their strengths, weaknesses likes and dislikes, and how they preferred staff to meet their care needs and wishes. These were updated regularly and when people’s needs changed.

We received mixed feedback about people having choice and control. One relative told us that their family member is able to choose what time to get up and go to bed. Other relatives told us that they hadn’t seen people being offered choices of meals, and they told us that they thought baths and showers were done at set times and days.

Staff knew people well and were able to tell us about people’s personalities, likes and dislikes and their interests. One staff told us, “We do have signage in the corridors but I’m not sure they all recognise those.” Another staff said, “We do offer choices of drinks and meals, but could make it better with more visual prompts and photographs.”

The dining area was nicely presented with tablecloths, choice of condiments and napkins in holders. Staff showed people a choice of squash type drinks to choose from. Staff asked people where they would like to sit, and who with and whether they wanted assistance, for example on staff asked, “Can I tuck you in?.” Adapted cutlery and tableware was provided to help people to eat independently where possible. People were being given meals that they preferred from their care plans, but people were not seen to be offered a choice. There were no pictorial menus, but we did see the chef talking to people in the lounge. There was a lack of communication aids seen in use, and doors to people’s own rooms were not all identifiable which would not support people in finding their way to their own rooms to remain independent.

Care plans reflected people's choices and preferences. A more detailed and consistent approach was required regarding how staff were to offer informed choices to people, without just giving them what they know they like. Care plans recorded how peoples preferences for care, support and meals/drinks but lacked information of how staff can support people to make informed choices. For example using pictorial aids, or written aids. Care records reflected people’s communication needs so staff understood how to provide people with information and how people communicated their choices and preferences. However there were some shortfalls noted, for example, one person lived with deafness and their risk assessment says for staff to communicate by writing things down, however this was not explored within the care plan. People were encouraged and supported to do as much as they could for themselves, to maintain and develop their independent living skills. People’s care plans reflected this approach, what they were willing and capable of doing for themselves safely, and what they needed staff support with. However, in one care plan it stated, Staff are to support X to take part in household tasks, sweep floor, wash up and wipe tables. This had not been followed through with a risk assessment and had not been recorded as happening. The registered manager acknowledged there was work to be done in this area and this is on their improvement plan.

Not everyone was able to tell us their views. One person said, "They look after me very well. Couldn’t really ask for better care. I prefer to be in my room but I sometimes go down stairs to events.” One relative told us, “They know people well, they alert us of any changes, and ring us immediately if something is not right.”

Staff said, “We are well staffed I think - we can anticipate behaviours and prevent incidents by knowing our residents. Most people have tell-tale signs of when they are getting upset so we go to them immediately. Staff knew people well and this allowed them to respond quickly to signs of distress or when they needed medical help.

There were dementia friendly signs used to help people to find their way around the home. For example, if they needed to find a toilet. However, there were old fashioned type road signposts which had signs to places that did not exist and this would be unhelpful to people living with dementia who are trying to find their way. During the visits we saw that staff responded to people’s immediate needs in a timely way.

Staff felt well supported by the registered manager and by the organisation. One staff told us, “They [management] ensure we can give feedback by regular staff meetings, supervisions and team meetings. We do have a staff room and we get breaks.” Staff said new staff are given a good induction process and that training is effective with a mixture of online courses and face to face training. One staff said, “We are like a family here, staff are close and support one another.” The registered manager told us how they operated an open-door policy for all. Staff told us they felt the management team were approachable.

The registered manager routinely used individual supervision and group team meetings to engage and support staff through any areas of concern or identify any training needs. Employee satisfaction surveys were sent out to all staff on a regular basis and the provider would collate all surveys and take action if required. Action had been taken in response to staff views, however these had not been recorded.