CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at The Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People said they felt safe. Inspectors found individual risk assessments, enough staff, appropriate recruitment checks, safe medicines support and systems for managing accidents and infection risks.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had induction, training, supervision and appraisals. People received support with food, health care and decision-making, with staff aware of their responsibilities under the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff knew people's routines and preferences, protected confidentiality and encouraged independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were individualised, reviewed and updated. People were supported with communication, activities, relationships and complaints, and no complaints had been made since the previous inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People, relatives, staff and professionals spoke positively about how the home was managed. Audits, meetings and surveys were used to monitor quality and make improvements.
What inspectors found, January 2020
The Lodge was rated Good in every area; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with no breaches reported.
This was a planned, announced inspection on 6 January 2020. One inspector spoke with people, staff, relatives and a professional. They observed care and checked care plans, risk assessments, medicines records, recruitment files, training records and management checks.
Inspectors found people were safe and supported by enough suitably checked staff. Medicines records were complete. Staff received training and supervision. People were treated with dignity, involved in decisions, supported to stay independent and helped to maintain health, relationships and community activities.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection, published on 5 July 2017. CQC said it would continue monitoring information and inspect again through its normal programme, or sooner if concerns arose.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe. Staff knew how to recognise and report abuse, and individual risk assessments gave staff guidance on keeping people safe.
“People told us they felt safe using the service.” from the report
Suitable and consistent staffing
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. The home did not use agency staff, and recruitment checks were completed before new staff started.
“The provider did not use any agency staff.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well, respected their choices and protected their privacy and dignity. People were encouraged to remain as independent as possible.
“During our visit we saw the interaction between staff and people was positive.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans reflected people's needs and preferences and were regularly reviewed. People were supported with communication, activities and links with their community.
“We noted care plans were reviewed and updated regularly.” from the report
Good staff support and oversight
Staff received induction, ongoing training, supervision and appraisals. The registered manager used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor and improve the service.
“Regular audits were carried out of care plans, staff training, MAR sheets and health and safety.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and update my relative's risk assessments when their needs or behaviour change?
- 02How will you support my relative's preferred activities, routines and links with family or the community?
- 03How will you communicate with my relative, and will their communication passport be kept up to date?
- 04How often will medicines records and care plans be checked, and what happens if an error is found?
- 05Has the planned replacement of the first- and second-floor flooring been completed?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC key questions and both the premises and care provided; the previous overall rating was Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 January 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, July 2017
Rated Good and remained Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with only minor record-keeping reminders.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 20 June 2017. One inspector spoke with people living in the home, staff, the cook, the registered manager and relatives. They also reviewed care records, staff files, training records, medicines records, rotas, audits and surveys.
The inspectors found that people felt safe and that there were enough staff. Staff had appropriate checks and training. Medicines were stored and given safely, risks were assessed, and people could access healthcare, suitable food and activities.
People were treated with dignity and respect. They were involved in decisions about their care and were encouraged to be independent. The home had systems for complaints, audits and gathering views. The overall rating and all five areas remained Good, the same as at the previous inspection.
People felt safe
People and relatives said they felt safe. Staff understood how to recognise and report abuse, and individual risk assessments gave staff guidance on keeping people safe.
“People had individual risk assessments which provided staff with information as to how to manage their risks and how to keep them as safe as possible.” from the report
Respectful care
Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. They knew people's preferences and supported them to make choices and stay as independent as possible.
“Staff maintained people's privacy and dignity by closing doors when providing personal care and speaking to them quietly when discussing sensitive subjects.” from the report
Personalised support
Care records described people's individual needs, likes, dislikes and preferred ways of receiving care. People were involved in planning their support.
“We looked at the care records of people and found they were written in a person- centred way.” from the report
Activities and community access
People were supported to take part in activities at the home and in the community, while staff respected their choices if they did not want to join in.
“People took part in a number of different activities, either within the service or in the community.” from the report
Unsigned care records
minorSome people did not want to sign their care records. The inspector recommended that the manager record when this happened.
“However, some people were not willing to sign their care records. We recommend the registered manager make a note in their care records when this happens.” from the report
Timing of notifications
minorThe home had notified the CQC about reportable incidents, but the manager was reminded that this should happen as soon as the event occurred.
“However, we reminded them that this should be done as soon as the event had happened.” from the report
- 01How do you record that a person has been involved in their care planning if they do not want to sign their care records?
- 02How do you make sure reportable incidents are notified to the CQC as soon as they happen?
- 03How often are care records reviewed when a person's needs change?
- 04What activities and community outings are available, and how do you support someone who chooses not to take part?
- 05How do you check that medicines continue to be given and recorded safely?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, and the report says all five ratings remained Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 July 2017 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 The Lodge
4 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2015Goodstayed GoodResponsive: Requires improvement
- July 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 April 2011.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Redbridge
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 £1,250 a week. 75 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Sidonia is a first class live-in carer whose dedication and thoughtfulness made her stay a happy experience.”
“Charity would take Nan on holidays day trips and shopping adventures”
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.