What the CQC found at Lindsey Hall Care Home

People, relatives and professionals consistently described staff as caring and supportive. Inspectors saw staff building trusting relationships and treating people with dignity.

“The staff are so kind and caring, I feel part of the home, they are worth their weight in gold.” from the report

Care plans included people's histories, interests, communication needs and important dates. Staff used this information to provide care that reflected people's preferences.

“Care plans were detailed, and person centred so staff knew people well.” from the report

People had access to varied activities and were supported to keep in touch with people important to them. Suggestions from residents led to activities such as gardening and exercise.

“People were supported to follow their interests and enjoy meaningful activities which had a positive impact on their well-being.” from the report

Staff received induction, ongoing training and regular supervision. Training included areas linked to people's individual needs, such as dementia and PEG care.

“Staff received a comprehensive induction to prepare them for their role, ongoing training, and regular opportunities to discuss their work, training, and development needs.” from the report

The home was clean and well maintained, with regular safety checks and facilities adapted for people living with dementia.

“The home was clean and well maintained throughout.” from the report

Guidance for staff was not always clear about when medicines prescribed on an as-needed basis should be given. The inspectors recommended that these protocols be reviewed.

“Where people were prescribed medicines, on an 'as required' basis, clear guidance was not always in place to ensure staff had information about when these medicines should be given .” from the report

Records did not always show that capacity assessments and best-interest decisions had been completed when restrictions were used, including for COVID-19 testing and medicines.

“The service was not always following the principles of the MCA. There was a lack of information in records to show mental capacity assessments and best interest meetings had been completed in accordance with the MCA.” from the report

Staff gave mixed accounts of what to do during a fire, and there was no evidence of timed evacuation practice. Accident, incident and falls information was not always analysed to identify patterns or lessons.

“There was no evidence to support staff completing time simulated evacuations.” from the report

Some end of life care plans did not give staff enough guidance about the support people needed. The manager said these plans would be developed further.

“End of life care plans did not always guide staff on support required to ensure people's needs were met.” from the report

The home had quality checks, but it did not always record completed actions clearly. A new quality auditing system was being introduced.

“Where improvements to the service had been identified through quality auditing, action was not always evidenced on the action plan.” from the report