Madeira Lodge

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) inspects care homes to ensure they meet high standards of care. This report covers the recent inspection of Madeira Lodge, detailing the findings across five key areas: safety, effectiveness, caring, responsiveness, and leadership. The aim of this summary is to provide families with a clear overview of the service’s performance as identified by the CQC, highlighting both areas of concern and any positive aspects noted. It is important to note that this report reflects the situation at the time of the inspection and the provider is expected to implement improvements.

Regarding safety, the inspection found that residents were not always protected from potential harm, with issues noted in safeguarding procedures and risk management. Specific concerns were raised about the consistent application of safety protocols and the thoroughness of risk assessments designed to prevent harm. In terms of how effective the care is, the service requires improvement as residents' needs were not always accurately assessed or kept up to date, potentially impacting the appropriateness and safety of the care provided. While staff received mandatory training, further skill development is needed to meet specific resident needs, and timely healthcare advice was not always sought. When it comes to caring, the service also requires improvement, as care was not consistently person-centred. There were instances where residents were not fully supported in maintaining interests or hobbies, and end-of-life care plans were not always in place. On responsiveness, the inspection indicated areas requiring improvement, particularly concerning the dining experience which was not always positive or dignified for residents. While staff reported being able to raise concerns, evidence suggested that not all potential issues were consistently escalated, impacting the overall responsiveness of the service to resident needs and concerns. In terms of how well-led the service is, the report found significant concerns, with monitoring and auditing processes not always effectively identifying necessary actions. Staffing was highlighted as an area needing attention, with some staff working excessively long hours, potentially affecting the quality of care. Furthermore, lessons from incidents were not always robustly learned.