What the CQC found at Lindley Grange Care Home

Inspectors saw warm interactions and staff responding quickly when people became anxious or distressed. Staff knew people's interests, preferences and care needs.

“People were comfortable and relaxed when interacting with staff who provided warm and compassionate care.” from the report

Staffing levels matched the provider's assessment of people's needs. Inspectors saw timely responses to call buzzers and extra support arranged when people's needs increased.

“There were sufficient numbers of staff to meet people's needs. We saw staff provided timely assistance when this was needed.” from the report

Staff helped people access healthcare and worked with a range of professionals. Food and drink needs were recorded and monitored, including where people were at risk of losing weight.

“People were enabled by staff to receive timely support from healthcare professionals where this was needed.” from the report

The home offered varied activities and recorded people's involvement. Complaints were handled appropriately and feedback was used to make some changes.

“A varied programme of activities was taking place and recording of people's involvement demonstrated how they engaged with activities.” from the report

Instructions for some medicines given when needed were missing or unclear. One person's eye drops had no clear instructions, and another person's medicine had been given without pharmacist advice on crushing it until inspectors raised the issue.

“We saw 'as and when required' (PRN) medicines were not always supported by written instructions which described situations where PRN medicines could be given.” from the report

Not all staff responsible for medicines had current competency assessments. The management team began updating these during the inspection.

“We found two senior care workers competencies were out of date and whilst two nurses had completed the practical aspect of their assessment, the theoretical check had not been completed.” from the report

Care plans were detailed, but they did not always show that people and relatives had been involved in planning or reviewing care.

“Although we could see care plans and risk assessments were reviewed on a monthly basis, we found the involvement of people and their relatives was not always evident.” from the report

Some care plans did not record all the details needed about equipment, such as which sling loop or hoist should be used. Inspectors recommended that this information be reviewed.

“However, details such as which loop to use on a sling or the type of hoist to be used was not always documented.” from the report

The building layout meant there was limited dining space. Some people and relatives ate in the lounge instead of the dining area.

“We observed limited seating in the ground floor dining area which meant some people and their relatives had their meals sitting in the lounge area.” from the report