CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at New Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm, and medicines, equipment and recruitment checks were managed safely. Inspectors found minor infection control problems, including no clinical waste bins in communal bathrooms.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had induction, training and supervision, and people were supported with food, drink and healthcare. Oral hygiene assessments were not in place and care plans contained little information about oral hygiene and dental care.
- Caring?
- Good
- People described staff as kind and caring. Staff knew people's preferences, involved them in care planning and respected their privacy, dignity and choices.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was person-centred and people could make choices about their daily lives. Activities were available, but staff cover was not always arranged effectively when the activity co-ordinator was absent.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a positive culture, approachable management and systems for reviewing incidents and planning improvements. People, relatives and staff were asked for feedback.
What inspectors found, August 2021
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care, with improvements needed in infection control, oral hygiene records and activities cover.
This was an unannounced inspection on 22 and 29 June 2021. Two inspectors reviewed care records, medicine records, staff files and quality records. They also spoke with people, relatives, managers and care workers.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were safe, treated kindly, involved in their care and supported by staff who knew their needs.
There were some smaller gaps. Clinical waste bins were missing from communal bathrooms, oral hygiene assessments and care plan information were limited, and activities might not always be provided when the activity co-ordinator was absent. The report says recommendations were made about infection control and oral hygiene.
Kind staff
People and relatives spoke positively about staff. Inspectors saw kind interactions and found that staff knew people's needs and preferences.
“People were supported by kind and caring staff.” from the report
Safe medicines
Medicines were received, stored, given and returned safely. Staff who gave medicines were trained and their practice was checked.
“People received their medicines as prescribed.” from the report
Good food support
People could choose meals and alternatives were available. Drinks and snacks were offered throughout the day, and people could help shape menus.
“Mealtimes were a pleasant experience for people.” from the report
Positive leadership
Managers had an improvement plan and staff felt supported. Inspectors found a positive culture and regular reviews of incidents and service quality.
“There was a positive culture within the service, staff spoke highly of the service and each other.” from the report
Communal bathroom waste
needs fixingClinical waste bins were not available in communal bathrooms for safe disposal of continence waste. Inspectors recommended that the provider continually review its guidance and practice.
“There were no clinical waste bins in communal bathrooms for people and staff to safely dispose of continence waste.” from the report
Oral hygiene records
needs fixingOral hygiene assessments had not been completed. Care plans contained little information about oral hygiene and access to dental care.
“Oral hygiene assessments had not been carried out and there was minimal information in people's care plans regarding oral hygiene and people's access to dental care.” from the report
Activities cover
minorActivities were available, but staff were not always deployed effectively to provide them when the activity co-ordinator was away. The provider said it would review this.
“Staff were not always effectively deployed to deliver activities if the activities coordinator was not at work.” from the report
- 01Have clinical waste bins now been provided in all communal bathrooms?
- 02How are oral hygiene assessments and dental care needs recorded for each person?
- 03What activities are provided when the activity co-ordinator is not working?
- 04How are staff deployed to make sure people's activities and daily choices are supported?
- 05How are accidents, incidents and improvement actions reviewed and shared with staff?
This was an unannounced first inspection of the care home and personal care support in the extra care housing, but CQC did not inspect the premises used for the extra care housing. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 August 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.
What inspectors found, March 2021
New Lodge: inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection prevention and control arrangements.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 4 March 2021. It was carried out as part of CQC's response to the COVID-19 pandemic and focused on infection prevention and control in the home.
Inspectors found that the home was clean and well designed for infection control. Staff used protective equipment properly, understood infection control procedures and had access to testing.
The home had detailed COVID-19 policies and careful visiting arrangements. These included booking visits, screening, rapid lateral flow testing and protective equipment.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report gives findings about infection control, rather than a full rating of all aspects of care.
Clean and suitable building
The home was purpose-built and its layout supported infection control. Inspectors also found it very clean.
“The service was a new, purpose-built home and the design and layout were conducive to enabling effective infection prevention and control practices.” from the report
Staff infection control practice
Staff used protective equipment properly and understood infection control procedures. The provider checked staff practice and competence.
“Staff used personal protective equipment appropriately and were knowledgeable about infection control procedures.” from the report
Up-to-date policies
The home's COVID-19 policies were detailed and reviewed regularly.
“Policies in relation to COVID-19 were comprehensive and regularly reviewed to reflect best practice.” from the report
Careful visiting arrangements
Visits were managed through bookings, screening, testing and protective equipment.
“There were robust visiting arrangements in place, including a bookings system, screening questionnaires, rapid lateral flow testing and use of personal protective equipment.” from the report
Support for staff
The provider took steps to support staff well-being during the pandemic.
“The provider had taken action to support staff well-being throughout the pandemic.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are the infection prevention and control procedures described in this report being maintained now?
- 02How do you currently manage visits, including screening, testing and protective equipment?
- 03How do you check that staff remain competent in infection control procedures?
- 04What arrangements are in place to prevent or manage an infection outbreak?
- 05How do you support staff well-being when infection risks are high?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the COVID-19 pandemic; the service was inspected but not rated and the other care questions were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 27 March 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 New Lodge
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- August 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- January 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 January 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
37 live-in carers within about an hour of York
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 £1,270 a week. 32 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“She was always 'just present enough': attentive, available, kind and engaging, but without ever over-stepping any boundary”
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.