Grafton Lodge

The service is registered to provide support to 22 older people, younger people, people with physical disabilities, people with sensory impairments and people living with dementia. At the time of our assessment 20 people lived at the service, 3 of whom were in hospital. At our last inspection we had rated the service requires improvement and there were breaches of regulations in relation to dignity and respect, safe care and treatment, good governance and staffing.

At this assessment we found the quality of the service had improved and breaches of regulations previously found had been met. However, there remained some areas for improvement at the service. Risk assessment records were inconsistent, and not all individual risks had been identified. People with pressure injuries or those at high risk of pressure injuries had not always been repositioned in line with their risk assessments. Building maintenance and renovation remained ongoing. The provider carried out some works to remove immediate safety risks whilst we were on site, and others were added to the action plan of works. We found that on the first day there were not enough staff to meet people’s needs. On day 2 senior staff told us that additional staff had been rostered on shift because people’s needs had changed. Cleaning records showed that on occasions people’s rooms were not cleaned as the housekeeping staff had run out of time. Some records also reflected people’s rooms were not cleaned if people were in their room. We observed a person’s medicines not being given in accordance with the prescriber’s instructions. Assessments and care plans had not always been reviewed on a regular basis.

Staff treated people with kindness and knew people well. Staff spent time with people encouraging them to participate in activities and maintain important relationships with their families and friends. Staff received training and support to carry out their roles. Relatives felt involved and told us communication was good. The service was mostly clean and tidy, and people’s rooms were personalised. Staff described a supportive and inclusive workplace where cultural, religious, family and childcare needs were respected. Safeguarding and whistleblowing policies were in place and were accessible to staff. These policies gave staff the information they needed in terms of reporting. People had choices of food which met their assessed needs.

The provider had a clear process to escalate health concerns in a timely manner.

People living at the service had access to health care professionals to meet their health needs. People’s choices were listened to and respected.