Lound Hall

Updated 2 February 2022

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.

As part of CQC’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic we are looking at how services manage infection control and visiting arrangements. This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection prevention and control measures the provider had in place. We also asked the provider about any staffing pressures the service was experiencing and whether this was having an impact on the service.

This inspection took place on 26 January 2022 and was announced. We gave the service 21 hours’ notice of the inspection.

Updated 2 February 2022

Lound Hall is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Lound Hall is registered to provide personal care to a maximum of 43 older people. At the time of inspection there were 20 people using the service.

In November 2017, January 2018 and May 2018 the service was rated inadequate following inspection visits. The service was found to be in breach of multiple regulations under the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. The service was placed into special measures and we placed conditions on their registration. This included a condition which prevented them from admitting further people to the service. The service implemented a new management team, with a new manager starting in January 2018.

At this inspection we found that the service had made the significant improvements which were required to comply with the regulations. This meant people were protected from the risks of receiving care which was unsafe, inappropriate or not in their best interests.

The service was meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS.) 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 supported this practice.

People and their relatives told us they felt safe living in the service and that staff made them feel safe. Staff demonstrated a good understanding of keeping people safe in discussions with us. Risks to people were appropriately planned for and managed. Medicines were stored, managed and administered safely.

Checks were carried out to ensure that the environment and equipment remained safe. Improvements had been made to the safety of the premises to reduce the risk of people coming to harm. The service was clean and measures were in place to limit the risk of and spread of infection.

People and their relatives told us there were enough suitably knowledgeable staff to provide people with the care they required and our observations supported this. Staff had received appropriate training and support to carry out their role effectively.

People received appropriate support to maintain healthy nutrition and hydration. Care planning now provided staff with the information they required to protect people from the risks of malnutrition or dehydration.

People and their relatives told us the staff were kind, caring and considerate. Relatives told us staff respected their family member’s right to privacy and that staff supported people to remain independent. Our observations supported this.

People and their relatives were encouraged to feed back on the service in a number of different ways and participate in meetings to shape the future of the service. People and their relatives told us they knew how to complain, and complaints had been investigated and responded to appropriately.

People received personalised care that met their individual needs and preferences. Some improvements are still required to further personalise care records to include people’s preferences and to include life histories for those living with dementia.

People and their relatives were actively involved in the planning of their care. People were supported to access meaningful activities and follow their individual interests.

The registered manager, clinical lead and provider created a culture of openness and transparency within the service. Staff told us that the registered manager, clinical lead and provider were visible in the service and led by example. Our observations supported this.

Improvements had been made to the quality assurance system in place and this was reflected in the significant improvements that had been made to the service.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.