CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Tye Green Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People's risks were identified and reviewed, and staff knew how to manage them. Medicines were better managed than at the previous inspection, but bed rail checks and accident records were not always formally detailed.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's physical, emotional, social and spiritual needs were assessed. Staff were trained and supported, and people received help with food, drink and access to healthcare.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were described and observed as kind, patient and respectful. People were listened to, offered choices, supported to maintain their identity and encouraged to remain independent.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's histories, preferences and communication needs. The home offered activities, trips and community links, and responded to feedback and complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The management team was visible and approachable, and staff, people and relatives were involved in developing the home. Quality checks and provider oversight were in place.
What inspectors found, January 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care and improvements in medicines, but some safety records needed strengthening.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 23 November 2017. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives, staff and the management team. They observed care and reviewed care records, staff files, training records, audits and meeting minutes.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The report says the home remained Good since the previous inspection.
Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and supported by staff who knew them well. Care plans were personalised, activities reflected people's interests, and people were supported with food, drink, healthcare and end of life wishes.
There were some areas to improve. Bed rail safety checks were not formally recorded, and accident records did not clearly show all actions taken to reduce risks. The provider also received a recommendation to involve people more in decisions about their bedroom environment.
Kind and personal care
Staff spent time with people and knew their preferences, routines and personalities. People were treated with dignity and respect.
“Because staff had time to spend with people they were able to adopt a caring and patient approach.” from the report
Improved medicines safety
The home had improved medicine storage, administration and monitoring since the previous inspection. Inspectors found no gaps in the medicine records they reviewed.
“At this inspection we saw that lessons had been learned and improvements had been made and medicines were now well managed.” from the report
Personalised support and activities
Care plans included people's life histories, likes, dislikes and communication needs. Activities included trips, music, church services, social events and an annual holiday for people who chose to go.
“The service had taken a flexible approach and changed the main meal time to evening as they found this worked better for people” from the report
Good communication and involvement
Relatives were involved when people's health or care needs changed. Meetings, surveys and suggestion boxes helped people and relatives give feedback.
“People, relatives stakeholders and staff were all involved in developing the service as surveys were sent out annually requesting their opinion.” from the report
Clean and welcoming environment
Inspectors found the home clean, safe and designed to support people living with dementia. There were clear signs, sensory areas and an accessible garden.
“We noted that the service was exceptionally clean with no odours.” from the report
Accident records lacked detail
needs fixingThe home took action after accidents and incidents, but its records did not clearly show what measures had been put in place to reduce the risk of harm.
“This meant it was not easy to identify what measures had been put in place to keep people safe.” from the report
People not consulted about a bedroom
minorOne bedroom was being decorated for a couple, but they had not been consulted about its colour or design. Inspectors recommended getting advice on involving people in decisions about their environment.
“However they had not been consulted regarding the colour or design.” from the report
Previous medicine errors
needs fixingThe home had previously had problems with medicine administration and infection control. Inspectors found improvements at this inspection, but noted that a number of safeguards had been raised because of medicine errors.
“However there had been a number of safeguards raised due to medicine errors.” from the report
- 01How are bed rail safety checks recorded now, and who reviews those records?
- 02How are accidents and incidents recorded, including the action taken to reduce the risk of harm?
- 03What changes were made after the medicine errors mentioned in the report, and how is staff competence checked now?
- 04How will my relative be involved in decisions about their bedroom, decoration and surroundings?
- 05How will you make sure my relative's routines, interests and communication needs are reflected in their care plan?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, with the overall rating and each question rated Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 January 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 Tye Green Lodge
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 6 January 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
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.