Lakewood Court, Dothill, Telford.
Lakewood Court in Dothill, Telford is a Residential home specialising in the provision of services relating to accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care and learning disabilities. The last inspection date here was 22nd November 2018
For a guide to the ratings, click here.
This provider also manages:
Link to this page:
Click the title bar on any of the report introductions below to read the full entry. If there is a PDF icon, click it to download the full report.
23rd October 2018 - During a routine inspection
This inspection took place on 23 October 2018 and was unannounced. At the last inspection completed on 15 March 2016 we rated the service Good. At this inspection the service continues to be rated as Good.
Lakewood Court is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.
Lakewood Court accommodates up to 18 people in one adapted building which is split into three small units and two flats which are used for people to receive short stay respite care. At the time of the inspection there were 15 people using the service. Registering the Right Support has values which include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. This is to ensure people with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen. The home was meeting the principles of this policy.
There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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.
People felt safe and were protected from abuse. People received support from sufficient safely recruited staff. Medicines were administered as prescribed. Risks to people were managed safely and systems in place ensured people were protected from the risk of cross infection. The provider learned when things went wrong.
People had their needs assessed and plans in place. Health needs were understood and people received the support with food and drinks that they needed. Staff received training; and felt supported in their role this helped them to provide consistent care. The environment was suitable for people’s needs. People had choice and control of their lives and staff were aware of how to support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service were supportive of this practice.
People were supported by staff that knew them well and were caring in their approach. People could make their own choices and were supported to maintain their independence. Communication needs were assessed and plans in place to enable people to communicate. People had their privacy protected and were valued by staff.
Peoples needs and preferences were understood by staff and they were supported to take part in activities of their choice. these. People were clear about how to make a complaint and these were responded to. People’s end of life wishes were documented.
Notifications were submitted as required and the registered manager understood their responsibilities. We people and their relatives were engaged in the service. Governance systems were effective in identifying concerns and driving improvements. The provider sought to continuously improve the service.
15th March 2016 - During a routine inspection
This unannounced inspection took place on 15 March 2016. At our last inspection visit in September 2013, the provider was meeting the regulations we looked at. Lakewood Court is a care home which provides accommodation and personal care for up to 16 people with learning disabilities or autistic spectrum disorder. Lakewood Court was previously known as Downing House but has recently changed its name. At the time of our inspection 16 people lived at the home.
There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. 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.
People told us they felt safe in the home. Staff we spoke with were aware of their responsibilities to keep people safe and report any concerns of potential abuse. The provider had systems in place that kept people safe and protected them from the risk of harm. People’s individual risks were assessed and staff knew how to support people safely when providing care. People received their medicines as prescribed and these were stored and managed safely.
There were sufficient numbers of staff available to meet people’s individual needs. The provider had recruitment processes in place which ensured staff had the appropriate checks completed before they began working in the home. People were kept safe by staff that had the skills and knowledge to support their needs. Staff understood the need to gain people’s consent to care before providing any support or assistance.
People enjoyed their food and had choices regarding their meals. People were supported to access health and social care professionals to meet their care and health needs. People told us staff were kind and caring and said that they received care from a consistent staff group. People felt involved in their day to day choices and were supported to maintain their independence. People’s dignity and privacy was respected by staff.
People and their relatives were involved in developing care plans and people received care that met their needs. People told us they were happy living at the home and took part in a number of different activities. People and relatives knew how to raise any concerns and were confident any issues would be addressed. The provider had a clear complaints procedure in place and information was clearly displayed within the home.
People and staff told us the home was well managed and the management team were approachable and supportive. The provider had systems in place to listen to people’s views and provided regular feedback. Regular checks were completed to review and monitor the quality of the care that people received.
23rd September 2013 - During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made
We used a number of different methods to help us understand the experiences of people using the service, because the people using the service had complex needs which meant they were not able to tell us their experiences. We found that systems were now in place to ensure the safe handling of medicines for the people using the service.
2nd July 2013 - During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made
We visited Downing House to review the improvements relating to the management of medicines following our inspection on 22 January 2013.
We found that some improvements had been implemented since we last visited the home. However, further shortfalls identified as a result of this inspection meant that we were not confident that people were receiving their medication as prescribed due to poor record keeping.
The systems put in place to assess and monitor if people were receiving their medicines were not robust to drive improvement or monitor particular trends. As a result this could affect the health and welfare of people living in the home.
During our inspection the registered manager immediately made some changes to reduce the possible risk to the people using the service. They told us, “I want to provide the best and am very passionate about the people we support. I want to put things right”.
22nd January 2013 - During a routine inspection
We met with most of the people who lived at Downing House. Not everyone was able to share their views and experiences with us so we spent time with people, observed interactions and also spoke with staff.
We saw that people who received a service were involved and consulted in the care and support they received. We saw that people were treated with dignity and their rights and privacy were respected.
We saw that people were supported to meet their individual assessed needs in ways that promoted their health and wellbeing. Care plans showed that needs and wishes, likes and dislikes were recorded. Staff were knowledgeable about how people preferred to be supported. Staff worked with health and social care professionals effectively to ensure that they could meet people’s needs.
We looked at medication arrangements and although the process was individualised we found that there were some discrepancies with some medications prescribed. We could not be confident that people received the right medication at the right time.
Staff told us that they felt well trained and well supported. We saw that staff supported people courteously and politely. People responded well to staff intervention.
The home had a complaints procedure in place and some people were confident to use it. Where people would not be able to use a formal process the home worked with advocacy services and family members to support people to raise and share concerns or worries.
25th November 2011 - During an inspection to make sure that the improvements required had been made
When we visited Downing House we found that some people were not able to tell us verbally about their views of the service. On the day of the visit the majority of people who live at the home were at a local day centre.
Care plans reflected an individualised service that was delivered around people’s assessed needs. Staff told us that they were aware of people’s likes, dislikes and preferred lifestyle and that this was taken into account when supporting them.
People’s likes and dislikes, hobbies and dreams were recorded in care files seen and activities and outings had been arranged taking these into account.
On the day of our visit we saw people being supported sensitively and discreetly. Staff were mindful about respecting people’s dignity and privacy and were seen to be involving people fully in relation to all decisions made. Staff were confident that people’s needs were understood and managed appropriately as they had received good training opportunities and felt well supported to do a good job. People were protected because staff were confident to recognise and report abuse.
People enjoyed a range of activities both within the home and trips out to places of interest. Staff liaised with families and people important to the person to find out what their likes and dislikes were.
People’s needs were assessed before they move in, and the needs and views of people already living at the home were taken into account wherever possible.
Visiting health care professionals told us that they had a good working relationship with the staff team and that the home was responsive to people’s changing needs.