The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Longlands

Overall: Requires improvement read more about inspection ratings

Pound Lane, Cassington, Oxon, Oxfordshire, OX29 4BN (01865) 881440

Provided and run by:
Four Seasons 2000 Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile
Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

All Inspections

24 June 2015

During a routine inspection

We inspected Longlands on 24 June 2015. Longlands provides nursing care for older people over the age of 65, some people were living with dementia. The home offers a service for up to 35 people. At the time of our visit 21 people were using the service. This was an unannounced inspection.

We last inspected in February 2014. The service was meeting all of the required standards at that time.

There was not a registered manager in post on the day of our inspection. A new manager had been appointed by the provider, whilst this person was transferring between services they had not taken on fully management responsibilities for Longlands. 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 were not always supported with their social and well being needs. People told us there was not always things to do in the home. There was no activity programme in place, and people's hobbies and interests had not always been recorded or encouraged and supported.. This often led to people being agitated or anxious as their needs were not always being met. There were enough staff to assist people, however, nursing and care staff were not always organised to make best use of their time.

People were not always cared for in a clean environment. People's bedrooms were not always clean and the equipment they needed had not always been kept clean.

Nursing and care staff showed genuine care for people when assisting them with their care or helping them with their meals. Most staff knew the people they cared for and had the time to talk with them.

People were supported to make day to day decisions about their care. People and their relatives views on their care was not always recorded and sometimes choices were not always available around food and drink.

People told us they felt safe. People were supported to take their medicines as prescribed. There were enough staff to assist people however nursing and care staff were not always organised to make best use of their time.

Staff told us they felt supported, however not all staff had received training and supervision to enable them to meet people's needs. The provider had not always ensured checks were made to ensure staff were of good character at recruitment.

The provider had systems in place to monitor the quality of the service people received. However, these were not always effective or being utilised to drive improvements. The new manager was working with a consultant and a senior nurse to bring about improvements to the service.

We found five breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of this report.

17 February 2014

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We carried out this visit because when we last visited in September 2013 we found that not all staff had access to or received appropriate supervision. We also noted that medication records did not accurately reflect medication in stock. The provider sent us an action plan in response to our visit. We found that the provider had taken appropriate action.

We spoke with two nurses, two care workers and the homes registered manager. We did not speak to people or their representatives during this visit.

Peoples' medications were stored securely and were administered appropriately. We observed a nurse assisting people with their medication. This was done in a dignified manner.

We noted that the nurses at the home maintained good records for the homes monitored dosage systems (MDS). We also saw that the nurses at the home maintained good records of people's controlled drugs.

The home had appropriate systems in place to account for the amount of medicines given and medicines left in stock. We looked at the medication records for five people and saw that the amount of medication documented as being in stock corresponded with the actual amount of medication we counted.

Care workers and nurses received appropriate training and had appropriate opportunities for professional development. For example we spoke with two care workers who had recently been given access to NVQ training in care. One care worker told us, 'I just started my diploma [NVQ in health and social care]. I requested it at supervision'.

Care workers and nurses were supported appropriately. We also found that arrangements had been made for staff to receive regular supervision. We looked at five employee files. Staff members told us they had received regular supervision and an appraisal. We saw that supervision records focused on care workers and nurses' professional development and where staff needed support.

13 September 2013

During a routine inspection

We spoke with ten people and one person's relative. We spoke to three care workers, a nurse and a domestic assistant. At the time of our visit 30 people were living at the home.

People we spoke with told us they were asked for their consent for care. One person told us, 'They always ask before they do something'. Another person told us, 'They don't do anything if I don't want them to'. We spoke with three care workers who told us they always asked for consent before assisting anyone.

People told us they were happy at the home. One person told us, 'This is a lovely place. I get all I need and more, the carers are good and have a wonderful sense of humour'. Another person told us, 'The staff here are beautiful people'. One person said, 'It's good, they treat me with respect like it's my own home'.

People were not always protected against the risks associated with taking their medicines because the provider did not have appropriate arrangements in place for monitoring medicines not administered through monitored dosage systems.

Care workers and other staff felt that support systems could be improved. We found that arrangements had not been made for staff to receive supervision regularly.

The provider had acted on safeguarding concerns in the home. We saw that the home had acted to protect people following a safeguarding concern. The provider changed how visitors accessed the service following these safeguarding concerns.

8 February 2013

During a routine inspection

During the inspection we with spoke with eight people using the service; two relatives; and four members of staff.

People using the service described how they were involved with their care and said that staff were 'kind' and 'helpful'. Staff were observed being respectful and considerate of peoples preferences. Relatives comments that they were 'kept involved.'

Records evidenced how peoples health care needs were met. People using the service confirmed that specialist input had been sought to meet their needs.

Staff confirmed that they had attended safeguarding training, and demonstrated that they were aware of their responsibilities. Records evidenced that the manager was mindful of peoples rights and supported them to make decisions.

Staff reported that they generally had enough people on duty to meet peoples needs. Feedback regarding how long people had to wait to be assisted was mixed. Peope said that staff 'did thier best' and were 'very good really.'

There was a very comprehensive quality assurance programme, which evidenced that the manager was seeking to continually improve the care and service provided.