Cherry Lodge

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

At our last assessment we rated this key question Requires Improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to Good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

The service was previously in breach of the legal regulation in relation to consent. Improvements were found at this assessment and the service was no longer in breach of this regulation.

This service scored 67 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider did not always make sure people’s care and treatment were effective because they did not always check and discuss people’s health, care, and wellbeing with them. People’s care needs were not routinely reviewed with them. Family members also told us that they were not routinely involved with their relative’s care plans. People’s communication methods were outlined within their care plans to enable them to receive care and treatment which works for them.

People’s records contained information relating to their nutrition and hydration needs. Staff supported people with their dietary intake in line with their assessed needs. However, some improvement was needed to accurately document people’s dietary intake to ensure the food offered was high in calories where weight loss was a concern. There was an electronic care management system which was used to record people’s care and support. Information in people’s care plans was reflective of good practice, for example, the use of the IDDSI (International Dysphagia Diet Standardisation Initiative) Framework, which was used to describe texture modified foods and thickened liquids for people where choking was a risk. Nationally recognised risk calculation tools were appropriately used to assess and monitor people’s needs/risk in relation to malnutrition and risk of developing pressure ulcers. The new manager demonstrated they were using up to date approaches to enhance staff knowledge and training. For example, they had arranged for, ‘Age Simulation suit’ training which offers the opportunity for staff to experience the impairments an older person might experience and have a better understanding of the difficulties they might encounter in their day to day lives.

The service worked well across teams and services to support people. The manager liaised with external professionals and people’s relatives. One relative told us, “[Relative] went into hospital recently and the paramedics were called. Straight away I got a phone call to tell me what was happening. Then they let me know later that [relative] was staying in hospital.” Another said, “The staff put people on the list to see the Nurse Practitioner on their weekly visit from the surgery.” Processes were in place to ensure any guidance or recommendations were followed. Staff explained that health professionals regularly visited the home and staff could contact them in between times, for any urgent advice or treatment. One health care professional told us, “I find Cherry Lodge and their staff very caring and efficient. Every week I visit I find that all members of staff are aware of who needs to be seen and why. They ask lots of questions which to me demonstrates their caring attitude towards their residents. They interact well with their residents and clearly have a good rapport with all of them.” Staff told us they had access to the information they needed to appropriately deliver people’s care, treatment and support. One staff member said, “The care plans are better I think, if there are any gaps the manager tells us verbally or puts a message on the [electronic system] with any new information we might need to know.”

The service focussed on identifying risks to people’s health and wellbeing early and on how to support people to prevent deterioration. People told us they received support to access healthcare outside of the service. However, people were not always involved in regularly reviewing their health and wellbeing needs where appropriate, but the manager told us they were in the process of improving this. Some people gave examples of where improvements could be made. One person said, “I do like to take exercise. I do wish there was more here. I can take part in chair exercises but wish the activities staff would offer more. I know there are lots of people who can’t take part but with my [health condition] I need to move more.” Another told us, “I like to keep busy and get bored with nothing to do. I need to keep my brain engaged.”

People’s care was monitored to help ensure they achieved positive outcomes. People gave positive feedback about living at the home. We observed closer monitoring of incidents and accidents in the service which helped to ensure on-going risk was mitigated and reduced the risk of recurrence. The manager had implemented improved systems for example, closer fluid monitoring for people at risk of dehydration, and education for staff in relation to accurate documentation. Where 1 person was experiencing distress, we saw that action has been taken to address the concerns and improve outcomes for the person.

People's capacity to make decisions related to their care and treatment had been considered, and authorisation had been sought to deprive people of their liberty where required. Record keeping in relation to this was improved. People confirmed staff respected their wishes. One person said, “They [care staff] always ask, never tell you.” Another told us, “They always ask, like they say do you want a shower? If I feel like staying in bed they leave me, that’s my choice.”