We carried out a review of the data available to us about Longlands Care Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Longlands Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
• Systems were in place to manage and prevent people, staff and visitors from catching and spreading infections. The home supported staff and people with social distancing. Additional cleaning was being carried out.
• Staff had undertaken training in putting on and taking off PPE, hand hygiene and other Covid-19 related training. Infection control champions were in place. These were staff who monitored staff practices to ensure the correct procedures were followed. The provider continuously passed on important information about Covid-19 to staff.
• Staff supported people’s emotional and social wellbeing. People were supported to keep in contact with friends and relatives through telephone calls and social media. Outdoor visiting had ceased, in line with national guidance, at the time of this inspection.
• The home was following national guidance for anyone moving into the home. Staff worked with people and their relatives to ensure they were aware of isolation procedures should they be needed. People were supported by a dedicated staff team who ensured any feelings of isolation and loneliness reduced. This included a range of individual social activities and contact with friends and family.
• Infection control audits and checks were carried out. The registered manager spoke positively about the hard work and dedication which staff had shown, which had helped to minimise the impact of the pandemic on people’s health and wellbeing.
Longlands Care Home is a care home which provides care for up to 43 people. The service does not provide nursing care. Care is primarily provided to older people, some of whom have mental health conditions or are living with a dementia. At the time of the inspection there were 33 people using the service.
The service accommodates people across two floors. There are communal lounges, dining rooms and bathing facilities. There is an enclosed garden for people to use.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People and relatives were positive about the caring nature of staff and the service they received. There were enough staff employed and on duty at any one time to meet the needs of people. The provider had an effective recruitment and selection procedure in place and carried out relevant checks when they employed staff.
Accidents and incidents were recorded and analysed; risk assessments were in place. The manager and staff understood their responsibilities about safeguarding. Medicines were managed safely.
Ongoing improvements were being made to the decoration and facilities in the building. Internal doors needed repair/replacement as they were all scratched and many of the windows were misted and in need of replacement or repair. This was part of the providers refurbishment plan.
Staff had the skills and knowledge to deliver care and support in a person-centred way. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service did support this practice
People told us their privacy and dignity were respected and their independence encouraged. People were able to participate in a range of activities if they chose to do so.
The provider was open and approachable which enabled people to share their views and raise concerns. People told us if they were worried about anything they would be comfortable to talk with staff or the manager.
The provider monitored quality, acted quickly when change was required, sought people's views and planned ongoing improvements.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update
The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 1 June 2018) and there was one breach in regulation. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.
Why we inspected
This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
We last inspected Longlands Care Home in January 2017 when we found two breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 were identified. We issued requirement notices relating to good governance and staffing.
At our last inspection, the service was rated 'Requires Improvement'. Following the inspection we asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve all five key questions to at least Good. At this inspection on 7 March 2018 we found there had been improvement in some areas, but limited improvement in others. This is therefore the second consecutive time the service has been rated Requires Improvement.
The home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
There continued to be shortfalls in the service that were identified at the last inspection. The oversight of the service by the provider had not improved. The provider visited the service regularly and this was confirmed by the registered manager and staff. However, quality monitoring was ineffective as it did not identify the concerns that we found at inspection.
Since the last inspection the audit tool had been developed to include prompts and pointers for discussion, however, the provider had not identified that fire drills were not happening regularly and not all staff had taken part. The audit had not picked up that numerous emergency lights were not working from April 2016 until September 2017. In addition they failed to identify that care records were insufficiently detailed and mental capacity assessments and best interests had not been completed.
During the inspection we looked at some bedrooms, toilets, shower rooms and communal areas to check the environment was clean and staff followed safe infection control practices. In one bedroom we found a worn divan bed and dirty toilet and in another room a soiled mattress. We asked the registered manager to undertake a check of all beds and mattresses within the service to make sure they were clean and fit for use. After the inspection they sent us a report of their findings and mattresses that were to be replaced.
During the walk round we identified a number of rooms requiring refurbishment and redecoration. The registered manager sent us their refurbishment plan for 2018 which highlighted that these areas would be part of the plan.
Staff understood the procedure they needed to follow if they suspected abuse might be taking place.
Risks to people were identified and plans were put in place to help manage the risk and minimise them occurring. Medicines were managed safely with an effective system in place.
Most people and relatives told us there were suitable numbers of staff on duty to ensure people’s needs were met. Pre-employment checks were made to reduce the likelihood of employing people who were unsuitable to work with people.
The registered manager had systems in place for reporting, recording, and monitoring significant events, incidents and accidents. The registered manager told us that lessons were learnt when they reviewed all accidents and incidents to determine any themes or trends.
People were supported by a regular team of staff who were knowledgeable about people’s likes, dislikes and preferences. A training plan was in place and staff were suitably trained and received all the support they needed to perform their roles.
People were supported with eating and drinking and feedback about the quality of meals was positive. Special diets were catered for and alternative choices were offered to people if they did not like any of the menu choices. Nutritional assessments were carried out and action was taken if people were at risk of malnutrition.
People were treated with kindness and respect. Staff knew the people they were supporting well and respected the choices they made about their care. The staff knew how people communicated and gave them support to make and express choices about their lives. People’s independence was encouraged. Activities, outings and social occasions were organised for people who used the service.
The provider had a system in place for responding to people’s concerns and complaints. People and relatives told us they knew how to complain and felt confident that staff would respond and take action to support them.
The registered manager was aware of the Accessible Information Standard that was introduced in 2016. The Accessible Information Standard is a law which aims to make sure people with a disability or sensory loss are given information they can understand, and the communication support they need. They told us they provided and accessed information for people that was understandable to them.
People, staff and relatives spoke highly of the registered manager. They told us the registered manager was supportive and approachable.
We found a breach of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we took at the back of the full version of this report.
The home had a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
Longlands Care Home provides care an accommodation for up to 43 older people and / or older people living with a dementia. At the time of the inspection there were 38 people who used the service.
The registered provider visited the service and completed an audit to check the service was safe, effective, caring, responsive and well led. However, audits were ineffective as they did not pick up on areas that we identified as needing improvement at this inspection. In their visit in June 2016 they identified that PAT testing was out of date and again in December 2016, however this testing was not completed until after our inspection in January 2017. We noted that there wasn’t a system to ensure all areas of the audit were covered. The audit had a section to check on risk assessments for people who used the service yet it was noted that in audits undertaken in June, September and December 2016 risk assessments were not looked at despite us mentioning this at the previous inspection and at an inspection of another home in the organisation.
Risk assessments were insufficiently detailed. They did not contain individual person specific actions to reduce or prevent the highlighted risk. This meant that safety actions to keep people safe were not documented and people could come to harm.
Records of staff supervision did not indicate that it was individual to the person and covered areas such as their performance, training needs or any personal discussions.
Staff had been trained and had the skills and knowledge to provide support to the people they cared for. Staff had an understanding of the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. This meant they were working within the law to support people who may lack capacity to make their own decisions. However, further work was required on some care plans to ensure that decision specific capacity assessments and best interest decisions were completed.
People were protected by the services approach to safeguarding and whistle blowing. People who used the service told us they felt safe and could tell staff if they were unhappy. People told us that staff treated them well and they were happy with the care and service they received. Staff were aware of safeguarding procedures, could describe what they would do if they thought somebody was being mistreated and said that management acted appropriately to any concerns brought to their attention.
There were sufficient staff on duty to meet the needs of people who used the service. We found that safe recruitment and selection procedures were in place and appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff started work.
Appropriate systems were in place for the management of medicines so that people received their medicines safely.
We saw that people were provided with a choice of healthy food and drinks, which helped to ensure that their nutritional needs were met. People were supported to maintain good health and had access to healthcare professionals and services. People were supported and encouraged to have regular health checks and were accompanied by staff to hospital appointments.
People were treated with kindness and respect. The care staff knew the people they were supporting well and respected the choices they made about their care. The staff knew how people communicated and gave them support to make and express choices about their lives. People’s independence was encouraged. People’s needs were assessed and their care needs planned in a person centred way. Activities, outings and social occasions were organised for people who used the service.
The registered provider had a system in place for responding to people’s concerns and complaints. People and relatives told us they knew how to complain and felt confident that staff would respond and take action to support them. People we spoke with did not raise any complaints or concerns about the service.
People, staff and relatives spoke highly of the registered manager. They told us the registered manager was supportive and approachable.
We found breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we took at the back of the full version of this report.
We inspected Longlands Care Home on 15 and 16 October 2014. This was an unannounced inspection which meant that the staff and provider did not know that we would be visiting.
Longlands Care Home is a residential care home providing personal care for up to 43 people and / or people living with a dementia. At the time of the inspection there were 40 people who used the service. Accommodation is provided over two floors and includes communal lounge and dining areas. Externally there are garden areas and a car park.
The home had a registered manager in place. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People told us they felt safe in the home and we saw there were systems and processes in place to protect people from the risk of harm. Appropriate checks of the building and maintenance systems were undertaken to ensure health and safety.
We found that people were encouraged and supported to take responsible risks. People were encouraged and enabled to take control of their lives.
We found people were cared for by sufficient numbers of suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Robust recruitment and selection procedures were in place and appropriate checks had been undertaken before staff began work. This included obtaining references from previous employers to show staff employed were safe to work with vulnerable people.
Appropriate systems were in place for the management of medicines so that people received their medicines safely.
There were positive interactions between people and staff. We saw that staff were kind and respectful. Staff were aware of how to respect people’s privacy and dignity. It was evident staff knew people who they supported and cared for well. People and relatives told us that they were happy with the care and service provided. People told us that they were able to make their own choices and decisions and that staff respected these.
The registered manager and staff had been trained and had a good knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). The registered manager understood when an application should be made, and how to submit one. This meant that people were safeguarded and their human rights respected.
People told us they were provided with a choice of healthy food and drinks which helped to ensure that their nutritional needs were met. People told us that they liked the food provided.
People were supported to maintain good health and had access to healthcare professionals and services. People were supported and encouraged to have regular health checks and were accompanied by staff or relatives to hospital appointments.
People’s needs were assessed and care and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual care needs. The care plans contained a good level of information and set out how each person should be supported to ensure their needs were met. We found that risk assessments were insufficiently detailed. They did not contain individual person specific actions to reduce or prevent the highlighted risk. This meant that safety actions to keep people safe were not documented and people could come to harm.
We saw that people were involved in a wide range of activities. We saw that staff engaged and interacted positively with people. We saw that people were encouraged and supported to take part in activities.
Appropriate systems were in place for the management of complaints. People and relatives told us that the registered manager was approachable. People we spoke with did not raise any complaints or concerns about the service.
There were effective systems in place to monitor and improve the quality of the service provided. Staff told us that the home had an open, inclusive and positive culture.
We observed the experiences of people who used the service. We saw that staff interacted and communicated well with people. The staff were attentive and demonstrated knowledge and understanding of people's needs.
The people we spoke with told us they were happy with care they receive. People told us they were involved in their care planning and able to make their own choices.
One person told us, 'I am happy, the staff look after me very well.' Another person said, 'The staff are wonderful even if they are busy and you stop them they are always nice.' A relative we spoke with told us, 'I viewed this place before my relative came in. I chose here and I am very happy.'
We saw that people had their needs assessed and that care plans were in place.
We found that people were safeguarded against the risk of abuse.
We found that appropriate staffing was in place to deliver people's care.
We found that systems were in place to monitor the quality of the service.
People told us that they were very pleased with the service and found the care was good. Some people would have preferred to be at home but said that this was nothing to do with the care being provided just their desire to be at home. Throughout the inspection we observed staff practices and saw that they constantly took the time to talk to people, engaged individuals in activities and in a sensitive manner explained to a person how they were going to help people meet their care needs. Throughout we found that staff treated people with respect.
One person told us that 'I like living here. I could live with my daughters, but I prefer to live here. The staff are all lovely, and that's half the battle.'
Another person told us that 'One of the problems here is that staff don't spend much time talking to you when they come to answer the buzzer. As soon as they have finished they are off doing something else. I like to chat and they don't seem to have the time'. They also told us 'The lift being broken has been a problem. I have missed medical appointments, as I can't get downstairs'.
Over lunch, people told us 'There are things such as bingo going on, if you like that type of thing'.
We spoke with a family member who told us 'It's smashing here, my mother seems happy here. I can visit whenever I want. There are lots of activities going on. There is a Halloween party happening this Friday'.