Lakeside House Residential Care Home

This is the first inspection of this newly registered service. It was registered with the Care Quality Commission 10 November 2022. Under the previous provider the service was rated as good in the report published on the 2 March 2019.

Risk assessments for some people using the service had not been updated as per the review dates and staff acknowledged they had not read the risk assessments for some time. Staff told us different risks people they supported faced but, accepted people’s records were not up to date. The director and current acting manager were working towards updating risk assessments for people using the service.

We found issues with equipment being used by people in the service who had not been assessed to use it. This put them at potential risk of harm and infection, as there was no risk assessment that referred to people needing the equipment in question. While the acting home manager took action to address this and sought appropriate referrals, there was a concern this had not been raised prior to our site visit and staff were using the equipment without raising concerns.

The service did not have a registered manager at the time of the inspection and which has affected oversight of the service.

Quality monitoring of the service was not effective. Care records were not easily accessible for the provider or acting manager due to the previous acting manager not informing where they were stored. There were no systems in place to capture risk assessments and care plans not being updated. Repairs within the home environment had not been identified at the time of our initial site visit. Whilst these had been addressed after our site visits, it highlighted the lack of governance systems to check the home environment.

Staff were recruited safely to the service and staff received training, however, only 1 member of staff received training specific to people with a learning disability and autistic people. Staff had shown a desire to receive specific training in these areas as this was the client group they cared for, they also requested more in depth epilepsy training.

Staff wore appropriate personal protective equipment. The service was quick to respond to a pest control issue within the service, however, relatives told us they wanted to be informed of future issues to manage pest concerns.

People’s needs were assessed before they began to use the service, but ongoing assessment was not evident. Consent to care and treatment was present and staff understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005.

Staff were kind and compassionate and respected people’s privacy and dignity. People were treated as individuals and the personal preferences respected by staff.

The service was in breach of legal regulations relating to safe care and treatment and good governance.