The Lodge is a care home providing accommodation, personal care and support for up to six adults who have a learning disability, some of whom may also have sensory impairment, dementia or mental health conditions. There were six people living at the home at the time of our inspection.

At the last inspection, the service was rated good and at this inspection we found the service remains good.

People were safe because staff understood the risks involved in their care and took action to minimise these risks. There was sufficient staff to keep people safe and meet their needs. The provider carried out appropriate pre-employment checks before staff started work.

Medicines were managed safely. Accidents and incidents were recorded and reviewed to ensure any measures that could prevent a recurrence had been implemented. People were protected against the risk of infection because the home was clean and hygienic.

People's care was provided by regular staff who knew their needs well and provided support in a consistent way. Staff had access to the induction, training and support they needed to do their jobs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

People experienced a good quality of life because staff received training that gave them the right skills and knowledge to meet their needs. People were supported and assisted with their daily routines, shopping and accessing places of their choice in the community.

People received appropriate support to maintain a healthy diet and be able to choose and help prepare meals they preferred. People had access to a range of health care professionals, when they needed them.

Staff attended regular supervision meetings and told us they were very well supported by the management of the home. Staff meetings were used to ensure that staff were kept up to date on the running of the home and to hear their views on day to day issues.

The provider had good systems to monitor the management and quality of the home and through regular internal monitoring the registered manager ensured that a range of audits were carried out to monitor the care and support provided. Where shortfalls had been identified they were addressed in a timely manner.

The Lodge is a care home providing accommodation, personal care and support for up to six adults who have a learning disability, some of whom may also have sensory impairment, dementia or mental health conditions. There were six people living at the home at the time of our inspection.

At the last inspection, the service was rated good and at this inspection we found the service remains good.

People were safe because staff understood the risks involved in their care and took action to minimise these risks. There was sufficient staff to keep people safe and meet their needs. The provider carried out appropriate pre-employment checks before staff started work.

Medicines were managed safely. Accidents and incidents were recorded and reviewed to ensure any measures that could prevent a recurrence had been implemented. People were protected against the risk of infection because the home was clean and hygienic.

People's care was provided by regular staff who knew their needs well and provided support in a consistent way. Staff had access to the induction, training and support they needed to do their jobs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

People experienced a good quality of life because staff received training that gave them the right skills and knowledge to meet their needs. People were supported and assisted with their daily routines, shopping and accessing places of their choice in the community.

People received appropriate support to maintain a healthy diet and be able to choose and help prepare meals they preferred. People had access to a range of health care professionals, when they needed them.

Staff attended regular supervision meetings and told us they were very well supported by the management of the home. Staff meetings were used to ensure that staff were kept up to date on the running of the home and to hear their views on day to day issues.

The provider had good systems to monitor the management and quality of the home and through regular internal monitoring the registered manager ensured that a range of audits were carried out to monitor the care and support provided. Where shortfalls had been identified they were addressed in a timely manner.

Our inspection looked at our five questions; is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, speaking with the staff supporting them and looking at records.

If you want to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

Staff were given guidance to ensure that they cared for people safely, and detailed risk assessments and records were in place to ensure people received the care and support they required. Equipment was fit for purpose and regularly checked and maintained. The provider clearly displayed a fire alarm procedure in the reception area.

Is the service effective?

People's needs were assessed and care was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan.

Care plans contained assessments of people’s care and support needs. These assessments described the steps staff should take to ensure each person’s needs were met. Evidence we checked showed that staff were following people’s care plans and risk assessments.

Is the service caring?

We observed that staff interacted warmly and considerately with people, and took time to meet people’s needs. The home displayed a code of respect in the reception area.

Is the service responsive?

Where the provider identified areas for improvement, these were implemented. Where people’s needs changed, the way they were cared for was changed to meet their needs, and external healthcare professionals were consulted.

Is the service well-led?

There was a quality assurance system in place, where audits of all aspects of the service were carried out. Where action was required we saw it was implemented.

People’s privacy, dignity and independence were respected. We found that the provider demonstrated respect for people, promoted opportunities for autonomy and placed the needs of people at the centre of the service.

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. All staff had received training in abuse awareness and protecting vulnerable adults in the previous year.

People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. One member of staff told us: “I can’t speak highly enough of the support I receive.”

People were protected from the risks of unsafe or inappropriate care and treatment because accurate and appropriate records were maintained.

Where people did not have the capacity to consent, the provider acted in accordance with legal requirements. Each care plan contained evidence that the provider had carried out assessments of people's ability to give consent under the Mental Capacity Act.

People experienced care, treatment and support that met their needs and protected their rights. Staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about the individual needs of people using the service and gave consistent accounts of how people were supported.

People were cared for in a clean, hygienic environment. The standard of cleanliness observed throughout the premises was good.

People were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Each staff file contained evidence that the provider carried out background checks on staff before they commenced work.

There was an effective complaints system available. Comments and complaints people made were responded to appropriately. Staff showed understanding of how to deal with people’s complaints.

People who used the service indicated to us that their privacy, dignity and confidentiality were respected. They told us they were happy with the care they received and could be involved in decisions about how their needs were met. People said they enjoyed the variety of activities they could engage in.

People conveyed to us that they were looked after very well in the home. They felt staff were helpful in ensuring their needs were met. One person appreciated the arrangements for his home visits. Another person indicated her appreciation of the support her parents received when they visited the service.

People conveyed to us that they felt safe in the home.

People we spoke with conveyed their appreciation of staff that worked with them. They felt staff were helpful in ensuring their needs were met. A person told us, “Staff are all right. I do find the staff friendly.” People told us that staff helped them to complete surveys.