Alma Lodge Care Home

“At this inspection, we identified areas that still needed to improve, and the rating has remained Requires Improvement. The provider was previously in breach of the legal regulations of safe care and treatment, and good governance. Not enough improvements were found at this inspection and the provider remained in breach of these regulations. We also found a breach of the regulation about safe and effective staffing.”

“People’s safety was not consistently considered, and risk was not managed pro-actively. There were no records of lessons learned following incidents. Care plans and risk assessments were not up to date or consistent with each other. There were care plans missing for some people. Whilst staff and people said they could speak up; they also said action had not always been taken. The governance and overview of processes had not ensured safe and consistent care. The in-house audits were not consistently robust and had not identified the shortfalls found and discussed during the inspection process. The provider took immediate action to make improvements where issues had the potential to impact on safe outcomes for people. For example, specific care documentation and risk assessments.”

“There were insufficient numbers of staff deployed, and care staff were also doing the cooking, cleaning and doing the laundry. This meant at times staff struggled to provide the support and care necessary for people. There was only one care staff member on duty between the hours of 6pm and 8pm which meant there was insufficient cover in the case of an emergency. The staff rota did not identify the staff on duty at night, and the management teams working hours were not reflected on the rota.”

“The home was not adequately clean and there were some environmental risks identified such as unsafe flooring which could be a trip hazard.”

“New staff received an induction and training which enabled them to manage people’s health and social care effectively. People’s privacy was respected and their independence encouraged within the limits of personal safety. Feedback relating to communication and response to concerns was mixed with some people reporting positive and timely responses from the service when issues were raised, and others telling us there was often a delay in getting answers when they raised queries. People told us that staff were kind and caring. Staff treated people with kindness and compassion, and there was a friendly culture in the service.”

“ ”