The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has rated Lavender Lodge Nursing Home in Derby, inadequate and placed the home into special measures to protect people, following an inspection on 18 February.
Lavender Lodge Nursing Home, run by Lavender Lodge Limited, is a nursing home that provides support to older people living with dementia and physical disabilities.
The inspection was undertaken in response to concerns CQC received from staff and relatives of people living at the home about the quality of care being provided.
Following this inspection, the overall rating for the home, as well as the areas of effective, responsive, and well-led, have moved down from good to inadequate. Safe has moved down from requires improvement to inadequate, and caring has moved down from good to requires improvement.
The service has been placed in special measures which means it will be kept under close review by CQC to keep people safe and it will be monitored to check sufficient improvements have been made. CQC issued warning notices following the inspection to focus their attention on making significant improvements around people’s care and treatment, person-centred care, and the management of the service.
Greg Rielly, CQC deputy director of operations in the midlands, said:
“When we inspected Lavender Lodge Nursing Home, it was disappointing to find a deterioration in the quality of care being provided to people in a place they call home. We found a closed culture where people felt unable to speak up about their concerns.
“People’s health conditions weren’t managed safely. For example, there was no risk assessment in place to support staff on how to safely manage seizures for those with epilepsy, including during bathing or out in the community, which placed people at risk of harm.
“Leaders didn’t take preventative action when incidents or accidents happened. One relative told us their loved one had an injury, but no explanation was offered about how it had occurred or how they were being supported.
“Additionally, staff were task focused and didn’t always take time to meet people’s social and emotional needs. For example, there were minimal activities or outings available to support people’s wellbeing.
“Following our inspection, leaders immediately instructed a management consultant to provide intensive support and oversight at the service to improve care for people.
“We have told leaders where we expect to see rapid, and continued improvements and will continue to monitor the home closely to keep people safe during this time. We will return to check on their progress and won’t hesitate to use our regulatory powers further if people aren’t receiving the care they have a right to expect.”
Inspectors found:
- People weren’t always protected from the risk of abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect.
- There were no systems in place for people to provide feedback.
- Communication support was minimal for people whose first language wasn’t English.
- End of life care planning lacked person-centred details on how people wished to be cared for.
- People weren’t involved in care planning, and most people and their relatives hadn’t seen a care plan.
- There wasn’t sufficient guidance in place to support people who needed staff intervention with moving and handling.
However:
- Staff felt the sharing of information about admissions, or changes in people’s needs was effective
- Leaders assured inspectors that a refurbishment plan was in place to improve the environment.
- Kitchen staff understood people’s dietary requirements, including how to prepare modified meals for people with swallowing difficulties.