CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Aniska Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, September 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe care, but the home was not always well-led and had no registered manager.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 28 August 2019. They spoke with people living in the home, visitors, staff and healthcare professionals. They observed care and checked care records, staff files, medicines systems and quality checks.
People told inspectors they felt safe and were treated kindly. The home had enough staff, medicines were managed safely, care was personalised, and people had access to activities and healthcare. Inspectors rated Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive as Good.
The main weakness was management. The home did not have a registered manager with the CQC, so Well-led was rated Requires Improvement. The overall rating was Good. Inspectors found improvements since the previous inspection, including that the home was no longer in breach of regulations.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines were stored, administered and recorded safely.
“The deployment of staff met people's needs and kept them safe.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were given choices and supported with dignity. Staff encouraged independence and built positive relationships with people.
“People were attended to in a timely manner and were supported with kindness and compassion.” from the report
Activities and social contact
The home offered varied activities and had improved one-to-one recreational time for people who stayed in their rooms.
“We saw a varied range of activities on offer which included, music, arts and crafts, quizzes, exercise, themed events such as wine and cheese nights and visits from external entertainers.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThe home had a new manager and an interim manager, but the new manager had not started the CQC registration application. This was the reason Well-led remained Requires Improvement.
“It is a requirement of the service's registration that a registered manager is in post, therefore, we have identified this as an area of practice that requires improvement.” from the report
- 01What is the current progress of the manager's application to register with the CQC?
- 02Who has overall responsibility for the home while there is no registered manager?
- 03What was the outcome of the ongoing safeguarding investigation mentioned in the report?
- 04How do you check that staffing levels continue to match people's changing needs?
- 05How do you make sure people who stay in their rooms receive regular one-to-one activities?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions, prompted partly by concerns about service delivery and an ongoing safeguarding investigation. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 September 2019 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, May 2019
Aniska Lodge was rated Requires Improvement overall; inspectors found safe, effective and caring support, but concerns about staffing, activities and management.
Inspectors visited without notice on 12 February 2019. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed care, meals, activities and medicines, and checked care records, recruitment files, training records, medicines records, complaints and audits.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective and Caring. People were protected from abuse, medicines were managed safely, staff were trained, and people's nutritional and health needs were monitored. People and relatives described staff as kind and caring, and inspectors saw respectful and personalised support.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Responsive and Well-led, making the overall rating Requires Improvement. Staff deployment did not always meet people's needs promptly, especially for people in their rooms or living with dementia. The home also had no registered manager, some environmental work was unfinished, and two mattresses were not set correctly, although this was fixed during the visit.
Protection from harm
People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff understood safeguarding and whistleblowing procedures and knew what to do if they suspected abuse.
“People were protected from the risks of abuse and harm.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were stored, given and disposed of safely. Staff who administered them had training and competency checks.
“Medicines were stored, administered and disposed of safely.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed positive interactions. People and relatives said staff were kind, caring and respectful, and people were involved in choices about their care.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans contained detailed information about people's needs, preferences, communication and beliefs. Staff were described as knowing people well.
“People received personalised support specific to their needs and preferences.” from the report
Staff deployment
seriousThe number and placement of staff did not always ensure people received timely support. This affected activities, meals and people who remained in their rooms.
“The deployment of staff in the service did not always provide a responsive person-centred service to ensure people's individual care and support needs were met.” from the report
Limited support in bedrooms
needs fixingSome people in their rooms had limited interaction and checks. One person could not reach a drink and another waited for assistance after calling out.
“On the day of the inspection we observed throughout the service there were limited interactions and activities provided to people in their own rooms.” from the report
Unfinished environmental work
needs fixingImprovement work was still ongoing in the dementia unit. Inspectors also found two areas of flooring that could cause trips.
“two areas of flooring were identified as potential trip hazards.” from the report
Air mattresses
seriousTwo mattresses for people at risk of skin damage were not set to the correct settings. Staff corrected this during the inspection.
“For two people the mattresses had not been set at the correct setting to ensure people were fully protected.” from the report
No registered manager
needs fixingThere was no registered manager at the time of the inspection. A new manager had started and was applying to register.
“There was not a registered manager for the service.” from the report
- 01How are staff deployed now so people in their rooms receive timely checks, drinks, personal care and social contact?
- 02How do you make sure people living with dementia receive a well-organised mealtime and meaningful activities?
- 03Have the trip hazards and the unfinished redecoration and furnishings work been completed?
- 04How are pressure-relieving mattresses checked, and how is any incorrect setting recorded and followed up?
- 05Has the manager completed registration with CQC, and who is responsible for leadership until then?
This was an unannounced planned inspection of the care home, covering the overall service and all five quality questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 May 2019 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Aniska Lodge
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- September 2019Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- May 2019Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- September 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- August 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2014Inspected but not rated
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 5 January 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
28 live-in carers within about an hour of West Sussex
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £1,020 to £1,170 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.