CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Lodge Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control arrangements were being followed. This included visitor checks, social distancing, personal protective equipment, testing, hygiene and outbreak management.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, September 2020
Lodge Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control.
Inspectors visited the home on 20 August 2020. The announced inspection was a targeted review of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found clear visitor procedures, temperature checks, hand sanitiser and masks. Staff had visual timers to support effective handwashing. Families were given information about different ways to keep in contact with relatives.
The inspectors were assured that the home was using personal protective equipment safely, following shielding and social distancing rules, supporting testing and managing infection risks. This inspection did not give an overall quality rating.
Visitor safety
The home had a clear process for visitors, including temperature checks, hand sanitiser and masks.
“The service had a clear process in place for visitors.” from the report
Handwashing support
Visual timers had been installed to help staff wash their hands for the required time.
“The provider had installed 'Wavewash' timers in areas where staff washed their hands.” from the report
Family contact
The home supported regular family contact through garden, window, drive-through and virtual visits.
“The provider had created an easy to read guide for families and friends explaining the different options for visiting” from the report
Infection controls
Inspectors were assured that the home was using protective equipment safely and had arrangements for testing and managing outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are the visitor checks, protective equipment and handwashing measures being carried out now?
- 02What arrangements are currently in place for garden, window, indoor and virtual visits?
- 03How often are people living in the home and staff tested, and how are positive results managed?
- 04What is the current process for preventing and managing an infection outbreak?
- 05Can you provide the home's other CQC ratings, since this inspection was not an overall rating?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only, so the service was inspected but not rated overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 September 2020 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, November 2018
Lodge Care Home was rated Good overall, but inspectors found that safe care Requires Improvement because some risks were not consistently managed.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 7 and 8 November 2018. Inspectors visited the home, spoke with people living there, relatives, staff and a health professional, and checked care records, medicines, staff files, complaints and quality checks.
People and relatives spoke positively about the care. Inspectors found kind staff, enough staff to meet assessed needs, safe medicines systems, good food and personalised activities. People’s privacy, dignity, choices and independence were respected.
The main problems were in safe care. Some people did not have clear care guidance for catheter care or skin cancer risks. There were also unresolved emergency lighting faults, and records did not always show what action had been taken after incidents or audits. Dental and eye checks also needed improvement.
The overall rating was Good. Effective, caring, responsive and well-led were rated Good. Safe was rated Requires Improvement, meaning inspectors found important areas that needed to be put right.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives gave positive feedback about the staff. Inspectors saw warmth, patience and respect for privacy and dignity.
“Staff interacted with people in a patient and compassionate way that respected their privacy and dignity.” from the report
Food and nutrition
People were offered a choice of food and drinks. Staff followed specialist advice for people at risk of choking or not eating and drinking enough.
“People were provided with a choice of pleasantly presented food suitable for their individual dietary needs.” from the report
Personalised activities
Activities were based on people’s wishes and included arts and crafts, pottery, flower arranging, outings and visiting entertainers.
“People told us they had access to a varied range of group and meaningful activities with regular outside entertainers visiting.” from the report
Open management
Inspectors found an approachable management team, good teamwork and a clear intention to improve the service.
“There was an open, transparent culture where the management team were approachable and staff morale was high.” from the report
Missing catheter and skin risk guidance
seriousOne person with a catheter and a history of sepsis did not have a catheter care plan. Guidance was also missing for managing the risk linked to a person’s history of skin cancer.
“This meant that staff did not have the guidance they needed with steps they should take to mitigate the risk of harm.” from the report
Incomplete incident follow-up
needs fixingRecords did not always show what action had been taken after incidents, including missed medicines. Medicines audits also did not always clearly record action taken after gaps were found.
“Accidents and incidents were logged and analysed by the provider but actions taken were not always clearly documented.” from the report
Staff training gaps
needs fixingThe home was asked to provide more training for staff supporting people with Parkinson’s disease, catheters, and sight or hearing impairment.
“We recommend staff be provided with additional training to meet the needs of people they cared for” from the report
Dental and eye checks
needs fixingPeople did not have regular access to dental and eye health checks. Management said this would be addressed urgently.
“We found further work was needed to provide regular, planned access to dentists and opticians” from the report
- 01What has been done to ensure every person with a catheter has a clear, current catheter care plan?
- 02Have the emergency lighting faults in the lounge and kitchen been repaired, and how was this checked?
- 03How do you now record and follow up actions after missed medicines, other incidents and audit findings?
- 04What additional training have staff received for Parkinson’s disease, catheter care and sight or hearing impairment?
- 05How are regular dental and eye checks arranged for people living at the home?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions and the overall rating; it was the first inspection after a change of ownership. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 November 2018 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 Lodge Care Home
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- September 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2018GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 September 2017.
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
35 live-in carers within about an hour of Essex
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 £1,260 a week. 25 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
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.