Alston Lodge Community Care Limited

Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

The provider had safeguarding systems to protect people and staff were aware of what to do and had received training on it. There were effective systems for assessing and managing risk, including when giving medicines, to help make sure people and staff were kept safe from foreseeable risks. There was a thorough recruitment process and sufficient numbers of skilled staff working with people and they received training, supervision and support so they could care for people effectively. People told us staff were reliable and acted quickly to get professional help if they needed it or if they were feeling unwell.

The registered provider had procedures in place for assessing a person's mental capacity in line with the Mental Capacity Act 2005. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. The staff provided the support people needed to enjoy their meals and drinks and to eat and drink enough to maintain good health.

People's social needs were considered as part of the overall service and staff assessed and regularly reviewed people's physical and mental health and any social needs. They had updated care plans when changes happened. Care plans had been developed with the involvement of the person, and where appropriate, their families and representatives. The care team had a good working relationship with other agencies, the local GPs, the nurse practitioner and the community nursing service. Care staff worked under their guidance and instruction to care for people living at home and at the end of their lives.

People and their relatives were aware of how to raise concerns or complaints and there were systems for their management. The service had systems to assess quality and people told us they were asked for their views about the support they received. The nominated individual and registered manager demonstrated daily involvement in the service. They understood their duty of candour and the requirement to notify us of any significant incidents at the service.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk