CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Lostock Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control arrangements were effective, including the use of protective equipment, testing, cleaning and infection outbreak management. They also found that a sign about visiting was misleading, but it was removed during the inspection.
- 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, February 2022
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control, but a visiting sign was misleading.
This was an unannounced, targeted inspection on 6 January 2022. Inspectors checked infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements, and whether COVID-19 staffing pressures affected care.
Inspectors were assured that the home was using protective equipment safely, supporting testing, managing infections, admitting people safely and following social distancing measures. Relatives said people were well cared for and protected from infection.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not result in an overall quality rating. It focused on infection control and related issues rather than all areas of care.
Infection control
Inspectors found good practice to protect people from infection. The home used an ozone machine to help deep clean rooms after visits.
“The staff ensured people were protected from the risk of infection by following good practice in relation to infection prevention and control.” from the report
Contact with families
People had access to tablets so they could communicate with family and friends online.
“People living in the home had access to 'tablets' to communicate via the internet with family and friends.” from the report
COVID-19 safeguards
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, supported testing and followed relevant distancing and shielding measures.
“We were assured that the provider was using PPE effectively and safely.” from the report
Confusing visiting information
needs fixingA sign on the door said visits were not allowed until the end of the month, although visits were allowed under current guidance. The sign was removed after inspectors discussed it with the manager.
“However, there was a sign on the door which said visiting was not allowed until the end of the month.” from the report
- 01How are current visiting arrangements explained to families and displayed at the entrance?
- 02What measures are in place if COVID-19 creates staffing pressures?
- 03How often are staff and residents tested, and how are the results managed?
- 04How do you check that staff use protective equipment correctly?
- 05How can residents use the tablets to keep in touch with family and friends?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, visiting arrangements and COVID-19 staffing pressures; it did not rate the service overall. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 February 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.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 8 December 2020. Inspectors checked infection prevention and control because the home was responding to coronavirus outbreaks.
Inspectors were assured that visitors were screened, PPE was used safely, testing was available, and people had COVID-19 risk assessments. They also found the home clean and hygienic, with increased cleaning routines.
Relatives spoke positively about the staff and said they were kept updated. The home supported garden and window visits, with safety measures in place.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not give ratings for the other areas of care.
Infection control
Inspectors found strong arrangements to reduce the spread of infection, including increased cleaning and effective use of PPE.
“The service had increased the cleaning schedules and routines to reduce the risks of cross infection. The environment was very clean and hygienic.” from the report
Visitor safety
Visitors were screened and given protective equipment and facilities to clean their hands.
“All visitors were asked to complete a health screening form, have their temperature checked and were provided with face masks to wear throughout their visit.” from the report
Family communication
Relatives said the manager kept them informed during the pandemic and helped them maintain contact with family members.
“Relatives told us they had been kept updated by the manager during the pandemic by email and telephone.” from the report
Testing and risk assessments
People and staff took part in regular COVID-19 testing, and individual risk assessments covered people's specific needs.
“People and staff were taking part in regular COVID-19 testing. Appropriate documentation was in place for people who were unable to consent to testing.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have your infection prevention and control arrangements changed since the inspection on 8 December 2020?
- 02How do you currently screen visitors and provide PPE during visits?
- 03How often are people and staff tested for infections, and how do you support someone who cannot consent to testing?
- 04How are individual infection risk assessments reviewed when a person's needs change?
- 05How will you keep our family updated if there is an outbreak or a change to visiting arrangements?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care areas were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 January 2021 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 Lostock Lodge
3 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- February 2022Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- November 2018Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2017Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 December 2010.
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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.