12 December 2014
During a routine inspection
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, and to provide a rating for the home under the Care Act 2014.
We undertook an announced inspection of Langley Court on 12 December 2014. We told the provider two days before our visit that we would be coming. Langley Court provides personal care services to people in a sheltered housing setting. At the time of our inspection 30 older people were receiving a personal care service.
There was a new care manager in post at the service, who was in the process of applying for registered manager status. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the home and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider. The former registered manager, who was employed by the provider at another service, also assisted us during our inspection.
People and relatives we spoke with were positive about their experiences of the service.
People told us they felt safe using the service. Staff demonstrated they knew how to keep people safe and how to report matters of concern appropriately. Assessments were used to evaluate any risks to people and how these could be managed or the risks reduced.
People were supported by the required numbers of staff. The provider carried out recruitment checks to ensure staff were of a suitable character to provide care to people.
Staff were provided with guidance in order to ensure they assisted people with medicines in the way they required.
Staff were effective in their roles because they were well supported. This included staff participating in regular supervisions and appraisals. All staff, including agency staff, took part in an induction process to familiarise themselves with the service and people’s needs.
People’s rights and decisions were respected by staff. However, we found that where people may not have the capacity to make certain decisions, appropriate records were not always maintained to show how people were supported in their best interests. We also found that records relating to people’s medical conditions required improvement to ensure staff had all the guidance they required to support people if they became unwell.
Where needed, staff supported people to ensure they obtained sufficient nutrition and hydration to promote their health. Staff also supported people to attend appointments with external healthcare professionals, if they required assistance with this.
People and relatives told us staff were caring. Where people needed extra support from staff, due to illness for example, staff provided this. People were listened to by staff and the provider actively sought the opinions of people using the service to drive improvements. People and relatives were involved in decisions about care.
Staff were knowledgeable about people’s needs. Staff reacted to changes in people’s needs to ensure they received flexible support.
People knew how to complain, although no one we spoke with had raised a complaint. People were provided with information about the service’s complaints procedure.
The provider carried out audits to ensure the standard of care was maintained. The provider identified areas for improvement and acted upon these. The manager maintained a ‘missed call log’ which allowed the staff to identify where calls had been missed and to follow these up to ensure people received the support they needed.