CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Lindhurst Lodge Residential Home
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, August 2022
Rated Requires Improvement; inspectors found safe, kind care, but activities, food and management oversight needed improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 27 and 29 July 2022. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and health professionals. They observed daily life, checked the building and reviewed care, medicine, staff and management records.
People were kept safe. There were enough staff for personal care, medicines were managed safely and infection control measures were in place. Staff were kind, respectful and knew people well. Care plans reflected people's wishes, and staff supported people to make choices.
The home did not provide enough regular activities or social interaction. People gave mixed views about the food, and some areas looked tired and outdated. Management checks did not identify all these issues, and feedback had not recently been gathered consistently.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Safe and Caring were rated Good. Effective, Responsive and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement. This was the first inspection since the provider changed in November 2020, and the home has been rated Requires Improvement for four consecutive inspections.
Safe staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to keep people safe and provide personal care promptly. Staff were also recruited using suitable checks.
“There were enough staff on shift to keep people safe.” from the report
Safe medicines
People received medicines as prescribed, and staff were trained and checked as competent. The home installed air conditioning after a medicines storage room became too hot.
“People's medicines were managed safely, and suitable infection prevention and control measures were in place.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People described staff as kind, friendly and supportive. Inspectors saw staff treating people with dignity and respecting their choices.
“Staff were kind and caring and they treated people well.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded people's needs and preferences. People and relatives were involved in care planning, and staff knew how to communicate with each person.
“People's care plans were person-centred and easy to navigate.” from the report
Support from health professionals
Health professionals said staff knew people well, sought advice promptly and followed the advice they received.
“Staff's knowledge of people's medical and social histories supported them to identify and escalate any issues with people's health in a timely manner.” from the report
Too few activities
needs fixingPeople said there was not enough to do, and staff did not have enough time to provide regular activities or social interaction. CQC made a recommendation about improving daily activities.
“People were not supported to take part in regular activities to ensure they were meaningfully occupied each day.” from the report
Food quality
needs fixingPeople gave mixed feedback about the food. On the inspection day, people did not like the lunchtime meal and were not offered an alternative.
“On the day of the inspection, people did not like the lunchtime meal provided and there was no alternative offered to people.” from the report
Tired environment
minorSome areas of the home looked outdated. A refurbishment programme had started, but people and relatives wanted wider improvements.
“Some areas of the building looked tired and needed refurbishment.” from the report
Management checks missed problems
needs fixingThe provider and manager carried out regular checks, but these did not cover all areas well enough. They had not identified concerns about activities and food.
“However, the audits were not comprehensive enough to ensure all areas of the service were of a good standard.” from the report
Limited recent feedback
minorPeople and relatives had not recently been asked enough for their views. This meant the home missed opportunities to identify and address concerns.
“Feedback from people and their relatives had not been consistently obtained during the COVID-19 pandemic.” from the report
Written incident information
minorThe home told people and relatives about incidents, but did not always provide this information in writing as its policy required.
“People and their relatives had been informed of any incidents that had occurred, however this information had not been provided in a written format.” from the report
- 01What regular activities are now available, and how much staff time is set aside to support residents to take part?
- 02What changes have been made to the food since inspectors recorded that people disliked a lunchtime meal and were not offered an alternative?
- 03Which parts of the home have been refurbished, and what remains in the refurbishment plan?
- 04How do you now check the quality of activities, food and the environment through your audits?
- 05How often are residents and relatives now asked for feedback, and how will you show that their views lead to changes?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five key questions and infection prevention and control; the report says this was the first inspection since the change of provider in November 2020. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 August 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 Lindhurst Lodge Residential Home
5 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- August 2022Requires improvementcurrent ratingstayed Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at Lindhurst Lodge Residential Home →
- September 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2017Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 2 November 2020.
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 99 live-in carers within about an hour of Barnsley
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 £1,260 a week. 82 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Ivy was very kind and gentle in all her dealings with my late mother. They got on very well and were able to share a joke and a laugh.”
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.