Appleby Lodge

The service had sufficient staff to provide all planned care visits. People told us no visits had been missed and that staff normally arrived on time.

The service recruitment practices were safe. However, necessary pre-employment checks had not been completed for staff who had transferred to this service from a failing provider. The provider took action to address this issue following feedback.

People generally had capacity to make decisions for themselves. However, where concerns were identified in relation to people’s capacity the assessments completed were generic in nature and did not relate to specific decisions in line with best practice.

Staff understood local safeguarding procedures and were confident any issues reported to managers would be investigated and addressed.

Risk assessments had been completed but did not always provide staff with specific guidance on the action they should take to mitigate identified risks.

People’s needs were assessed and identified before their first care visit to ensure their preferences could be met.

Staff had the skills necessary to meet people’s needs and care plans provided them with accurate guidance.

The service worked collaboratively with health care professionals to support people to remain living at home.

People were complimentary of the service and the manager met people regularly to gather their feedback. Staff respected people’s choices in relation to how support should be provided.

Staff treated people with kindness and ensured their dignity was protected.

Care visits were not rushed and staff took time to get to know the people they supported.

People were supported to maintain their independence and staff varied how they presented information to aid people’s understanding.

Staff were well supported by their managers and there were processes in place to celebrate examples of good staff practice.

People received person centred care that met their needs. Staff told us people’s care plans were accurate and up to date.

The service communicated with people effectively and the deputy manager visited people at home regularly to gather their feedback.

Everyone was treated fairly and with respect. The provider’s leadership and staff team ensured people were protected from discrimination.

The service was well led and staff felt well supported and able to access guidance when needed. Team meetings had been held regularly and staff had received regular supervision.

People were complimentary of the service’s culture and told us they would recommend the service to others.

Quality assurance systems were effective, and the service leadership engaged positively with local health and social care partners and the inspection process.

The provider had appropriately investigated and addressed individual complaints. However, records showed multiple examples of similar minor complaints being received. This demonstrated learning from complaints had not been used to drive improvements in overall performance.