CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at White Lodge Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and identified risks. Inspectors found enough staff, robust recruitment checks, safe medicine systems and regular environmental checks.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had suitable training, supervision and support. People were helped with nutrition, healthcare, communication, choice and least restrictive care.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect. Staff supported people's independence, relationships, privacy and involvement in decisions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's histories, preferences and routines. Activities, communication support, complaints handling and end of life care were tailored to people's needs.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a positive culture and quality checks were used to make improvements. People, relatives and staff had opportunities to give feedback, and the report says previous required improvements had been completed.
What inspectors found, April 2019
White Lodge Residential Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some environmental improvements still being completed.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 19 March 2019. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff, the manager and a healthcare professional. They also checked care records, medicine records, staff files, incident reports and quality audits.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine systems, clean surroundings and suitable care for people living with dementia or frailty.
People were described as treated with kindness and respect. Care was tailored to people's choices, routines and interests. The home had acted on problems identified at the previous inspection, including documenting risks and improving quality checks.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff and organised medicine systems. Staff administering medicines were trained and had regular competency checks.
“Medicines systems were organised and people were receiving their medicines when they should.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with kindness and respect. Staff knew people well and supported their privacy, independence and personal identity.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans recorded people's preferences, routines and interests. Staff followed these plans, including preferred sleep times and music choices.
“People received personalised care that was responsive to their individual needs.” from the report
Good management and improvement
The manager used audits and feedback to identify and address problems. Improvements requested at the previous inspection had been completed.
“Quality assurance tools were imbedded in practice and the registered manager acted to drive improvements in a timely way.” from the report
Some water checks had been missed
minorAn audit found that water temperature checks had not been completed in some rooms, which could affect protection from scalding. The report says this was acted on immediately.
“An environmental audit identified that water temperature checks had not been completed in some rooms to reduce the risk of scalding for some people.” from the report
Garden access was still being improved
minorPeople had said the garden was not wheelchair friendly and needed more protection from the summer sun. More umbrellas had been provided, while accessibility work was due to begin.
“The garden was not wheelchair friendly and there needed to be more protection for people during summer months.” from the report
- 01What work has now been completed to make the garden wheelchair friendly?
- 02How do you make sure water temperature checks are completed in every room?
- 03How many staff are usually on duty during the day and at night, and how do you cover absences?
- 04How would you tailor activities and daily routines to my relative's interests and preferences?
- 05How are relatives involved in care reviews and decisions about changing needs?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall rating; the improvements requested at the December 2017 inspection were checked and found to be completed. This explanation was written from the published report of 12 April 2019 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 2018
White Lodge Residential Home was rated Requires Improvement; care was kind and responsive, but safety checks, recruitment records and management systems needed improvement.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 20 December 2017. Inspectors spoke with residents, relatives, staff and healthcare professionals. They observed care and reviewed care plans, recruitment files and other records.
Inspectors found that people generally felt safe and there were enough staff. Medicines were managed safely, the home was clean, and people received kind care, suitable food, activities and help from healthcare services.
However, some health and safety checks were not being completed regularly. Recruitment checks were not always thorough. Some care plans needed more detail. The change in management meant that formal audits and quality checks were not yet properly established.
The overall rating was Requires Improvement. Effective, Caring and Responsive were rated Good. Safe and Well-led were rated Requires Improvement. This was the first time the home received an overall Requires Improvement rating.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff speaking gently and supporting people's choices, dignity and privacy. Relatives and residents spoke positively about the care.
“People were treated with kindness and compassion. Relatives of people we spoke with said that they were always welcomed into the home and staff were always polite and courteous.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicines were stored and given appropriately. Controlled drugs were checked against the register and were accurate.
“Medicines were managed appropriately with adequate procedures for storage and administration.” from the report
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Call bells were answered promptly during the inspection.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Food and activities
People were offered meal choices, drinks and snacks, with special diets supported. Activities included group sessions and one-to-one support.
“People were supported to engage in activities both inside and outside the home and were able to participate either in a group or a one to one basis.” from the report
Clean environment
The home was clean, free from unpleasant smells and had systems for managing laundry and infection risks.
“The premises were clean and free of any unpleasant odours.” from the report
Missing safety checks
needs fixingSome environmental checks, including water temperature and room risk checks, had not been completed regularly. Inspectors said this could mean hazards were not identified quickly.
“Not all health and safety records including environmental checks were being carried out on a regular basis.” from the report
Recruitment checks
seriousSome staff files did not contain full employment histories or suitable references. One file included negative reference comments without enough evidence of follow-up action.
“Pre-employment checks such as exploring gaps in employment history and obtaining references from people's most recent employer were not always carried out and documented.” from the report
Care plan detail
needs fixingSome risk assessments and care plans did not give staff enough detail about people's needs or how to reduce risks and recognise deterioration.
“Some of the risk assessments did not include enough detailed information for staff to fully understand the needs of the person and how to support them to minimise the risk.” from the report
Quality monitoring
needs fixingFormal audits and quality checks were not fully in place after changes in management. Some records were difficult to find or were not up to date.
“Processes for ensuring that safety risks were fully assessed and quality assurance checks were not fully embedded in the service.” from the report
- 01Have the weekly water temperature checks and monthly room risk assessments now been completed regularly?
- 02How do you check references, employment gaps and full work histories before staff start work?
- 03How have you added more detail to care plans for people with conditions such as Parkinson's?
- 04Who is now responsible for formal audits and quality checks, and how often are they completed?
- 05Can you show families where current building, safety and quality records are kept?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and the overall quality of the care home. This explanation was written from the published report of 23 March 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 White Lodge Residential Home
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- April 2019Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at White Lodge Residential Home →
- March 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
Read what inspectors found at White Lodge Residential Home →
- July 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2015Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of West Sussex
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 £1,170 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
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.