CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Jubilee Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People told inspectors they felt safe. Risks were assessed, staff were trained, medicines were monitored and infection control procedures were in place. Mental capacity records and CCTV consent needed improvement.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not inspected during this focused visit. Its previous rating was used to calculate the overall rating.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Staff felt supported and managers understood their roles. However, some audits were not completed regularly, and people's goals and achievements were not always clearly recorded.
What inspectors found, June 2023
Rated Good overall; inspectors found people were safe and supported to live independently, but records and management checks needed improvement.
This was a focused inspection on 18 April and 12 May 2023. One inspector spoke with a resident, family members, staff and a healthcare professional. Records about care, risks, medicines, recruitment and management were also checked.
The safe and well-led areas were rated Good. People told inspectors they felt safe. Risks were assessed, medicines were managed safely, staff recruitment checks were completed and infection control arrangements were in place.
Inspectors found some gaps. Mental capacity assessments did not always contain all the necessary information. CCTV consent needed review, goals and achievements were not always clearly recorded, and some management audits were not completed regularly.
The overall rating was Good. However, this was not a full inspection of all five areas. The ratings for Caring, Effective and Responsive were carried forward from the previous inspection.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe and received support when they needed it. Staff knew how to respond to possible abuse.
“People told us they felt safe living at the care home and that they received support as necessary.” from the report
Risks and medicines
Care risks were identified and assessed. People were supported to manage their own medicines when they were able to do so, with records and procedures in place.
“People were supported to self-manage their medicines where they were assessed as being able to do so.” from the report
Independence
Staff supported people to make choices, develop skills and take part in everyday activities such as cooking and household tasks.
“People were supported to develop and learn new skills.” from the report
Staff support
Staff said they felt supported. Team meetings were used to discuss improvements and agree actions.
“Team meetings were carried out to discuss any improvement required and to agree on actions as necessary.” from the report
Mental capacity and CCTV records
needs fixingSome mental capacity assessments were not specific enough or did not explain how decisions had been reached. Consent for CCTV in communal areas also needed review.
“However, we found mental capacity assessments completed by the provider were not always time and decision specific.” from the report
Management checks
needs fixingSome quality audits were not completed regularly. The provider was asked to review its governance systems and said this would be corrected.
“Although we saw that some audits had not been carried out regularly by the registered manager” from the report
Recording people's progress
minorPeople's goals and achievements were not always recorded clearly enough for staff to monitor their progress.
“However, people's goals and achievements were not always clearly recorded to help staff to monitor people's progress.” from the report
Home refurbishment
minorThe home was suitable and free from clutter, but inspectors said some refurbishment was needed to make it more homely and inviting.
“However, the home required some refurbishment to help ensure it was homely and inviting.” from the report
- 01What changes have you made to ensure mental capacity assessments are time- and decision-specific?
- 02Has each person's consent for CCTV in communal areas been reviewed and recorded?
- 03How do you now make sure management audits are completed regularly?
- 04How are people's goals and achievements recorded and reviewed?
- 05What refurbishment work has been completed, and what work remains?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other ratings were carried forward from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 9 June 2023 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, March 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control and visiting arrangements during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was a targeted inspection on 10 February 2022. Inspectors looked mainly at infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected the home. The inspection was announced 24 hours beforehand.
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, supported handwashing, screened visitors and arranged testing for people and staff. They also found good ventilation and records showing that cleaning schedules were followed.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give an overall quality rating or a rating for most of the five areas. The Safe area was also marked inspected but not rated.
Visitor infection checks
Visitors were offered handwashing or hand sanitiser and were screened for symptoms before entering. The home used temperature checks, a visitors book and a COVID-19 questionnaire.
“Visitors were screened for symptoms of acute respiratory infection before being allowed to enter the home” from the report
Protective equipment
Staff used PPE where social distancing could not be maintained. Inspectors found that its use followed government guidance and that staff had received relevant training.
“Staff were observed wearing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) in areas where 2m social distancing could not be achieved” from the report
Testing and monitoring
People were checked daily for COVID-19 symptoms. The home also had a process for monitoring people after community outings and completing lateral flow tests.
“People were assessed daily for the development of symptoms of COVID-19.” from the report
Cleaning and ventilation
The home used ventilation measures and had cleaning schedules covering frequently touched areas. Inspectors found records showing that the cleaning schedule was followed.
“Records/checks of cleaning showed compliance with the cleaning schedule.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are you currently monitoring people for symptoms and testing them after they go out into the community?
- 02How do you check that cleaning of high-touch areas is completed and recorded?
- 03How do you manage staffing pressures linked to COVID-19, and what impact have they had on care?
- 04How do you check that staff and visiting professionals meet the current vaccination requirements?
- 05When was the last full inspection covering Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not rate the other four areas or give an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 March 2022 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 Jubilee Lodge
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- June 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 21 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Merton
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 £980 to £1,230 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
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.