Archived: Colton Lodges Care Home

Updated 10 June 2016

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection took place on 4 April 2016 and was unannounced.

The inspection team consisted of four adult social care inspectors and three specialist advisors in governance, nursing and medication.

At the time of our inspection there were 126 people living at the home. During our visit we spoke with 15 people who lived at Colton Lodges, six relatives, 16 members of staff, the clinical services manager and the registered manager. We spent time observing care in the communal areas to help us understand the experience of people living at the home. We looked at all areas of the home including people’s bedrooms, communal bathrooms and lounge areas. We spent some time looking at documents and records that related to people’s care and the management of the home. We looked at 15 people’s care plans and 19 medication records.

Before our inspection, we reviewed all the information we held about the home. We requested a Provider Information Return (PIR) This is a document that provides relevant and up to date information about the home that is provided by the manager or owner of the home to the Care Quality Commission. The provider completed the PIR. We contacted the local authority and Healthwatch. We were not aware of any concerns by the local authority. Healthwatch feedback stated they had no comments or concerns. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion that gathers and represents the views of the public about health and social care services in England.

Updated 10 June 2016

This was an unannounced inspection carried out on 4 April 2016.

Colton Lodges Nursing Home is a purpose built home comprising of four units Newsam, Whitkirk, Elmet and Garforth. It provides care for up to 138 people. At the time of inspection 126 people were living at Colton Lodges Nursing Home.

At the last inspection in March 2015 we found the provider had breached three regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.The registered person did not make appropriate steps to ensure that, at all times, there were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified and skilled and experience staff to meet people’s health and welfare needs. There were not suitable arrangements in place to ensure staff were appropriately supported in relation to their responsibilities to enable them to deliver care safely and to an appropriate standard. The registered person did not take proper steps to ensure that each person was protected against the risks of receiving care or treatment that was inappropriate or unsafe.

The provider told us they would meet the regulations by the end of August 2015. The provider had completed an action plan and on this inspection, we found improvements had been made with regard to these breaches.

At the time of this inspection the home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Overall, people who used the service and visiting relatives said there were enough staff to meet people’s needs. However, we noted that people who used the service had to wait for periods of time for the support they needed such as assistance with meals.

People told us they felt safe and did not have any concerns about the care they received.

There were systems in place to record accidents and incidents.

The premises and equipment were well maintained to ensure people’s safety. The premises were clean in all four units and decorated to a good standard.

Medicines were administered to people by trained staff and people received their prescribed medication when they needed it. However two peoples medication had not been received for two weeks from the local pharmacy.

There were policies and procedures in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005. Staff were trained in the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005). However in one unit staff did not fully understand what they must do to comply with the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act.

People were supported by staff who treated them with kindness and respect. Overall, their choices and preferences were respected and they were supported to make their own decisions whenever they could do so. Staff could explain to us what privacy and dignity meant to them and the people they supported.

Most people told us they enjoyed the food and got the support they needed with meals. However, some improvements were needed to ensure people who were underweight and needed support at mealtimes had staff to support and encourage them.

Robust recruitment and selection procedures were in place to make sure suitable staff worked with people who used the service. Staff felt supported and had regular supervisions and appraisals.

There were good systems in place to ensure complaints and concerns were fully investigated. People had the opportunity to say what they thought about the service and the feedback gave the provider an opportunity for learning and improvement. People told us they would feel comfortable raising concerns or complaints. People provided positive feedback about the unit managers and registered manager.

We saw the provider had a system in place for the purpose of assessing and monitoring the quality of the service.