You are here

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 27 September 2017

The home is registered as Longley Health Care Limited but is known as Longley Park View. The home is registered to provide accommodation and nursing care for up to 59 people who may be living with dementia, have mental health difficulties and whose behaviours may also challenge. The home has four units over two floors, accessed by a passenger lift. The home is purpose built and situated in a residential area of Sheffield, close to local amenities and transport links. The home has a garden and car park.

At the time of this inspection the home was undergoing a major refurbishment and one unit was closed to accommodate this.

There was a manager at the service who was registered with Care Quality Commission (CQC). A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Our last inspection at Longley Park View took place on 19 July 2016. We found two breaches in the regulations of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014, in regard to Regulation 18: Staffing and Regulation 19; Fit and proper persons employed. The registered provider sent an action plan detailing how they were going to make improvements. At this inspection we checked improvements the registered provider had made. We found sufficient improvements had been made to meet the requirements of Regulation 18: Staffing, as staff had been provided with regular supervision in line with the registered providers policy. We also found sufficient improvements had been made to Regulation 19: Fit and proper persons employed, as records were in place to show the registered provider had obtained all of the required information for each person employed.

This inspection took place on 21 August 2017 and was unannounced. This meant the people who lived at Longley Park View and the staff who worked there did not know we were coming. On the day of our inspection there were 41 people living at Longley Park View.

People spoke positively about their experience of living at Longley Park View. They told us they felt safe and they liked the staff.

Staff were aware of safeguarding procedures and knew what to do if an allegation was made or they suspected abuse.

Shortfalls in the systems for the proper and safe management of medicines had been identified and were being dealt with. Some aspects of these systems required further improvement.

Risk assessments were in place that identified risk and the actions required of staff to mitigate these risks. Systems would be more robust if records clearly detailed the support provided was in line with this.

Sufficient numbers of staff were provided to meet people’s needs.

Staff were provided with relevant training, supervision and appraisal so they had the skills they needed to undertake their role.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The registered provider’s policies and systems supported this practice.

People had access to a range of health care professionals to help maintain their health. A varied diet was provided, which took into account dietary needs and preferences so people’s health was promoted and choices could be respected.

Staff knew people well and positive, caring relationships had been developed. People were encouraged to express their views and they were involved in decisions about their care. People’s privacy and dignity was respected and promoted. Staff understood how to support people in a sensitive way.

A programme of activities was in place to provide people living at the home with a range of leisure opportunities.

People living at the home said they could speak with staff if they had any worries or concerns and they would be listene

Inspection areas

Safe

Requires improvement

Updated 27 September 2017

The service was not always safe.

Shortfalls in the systems for the proper and safe management of medicines had been identified and were being dealt with. Some aspects of these systems required further improvement.

Records of the support provided did not always evidence the actions required of staff to mitigate identified risk had been adhered to.

Staff were aware of their responsibilities in keeping people safe. People told us they felt safe. People were content and happy to be with staff.

The staff recruitment procedures in operation promoted people’s safety.

Staffing levels were adequate to meet the needs of people who used the service.

Effective

Good

Updated 27 September 2017

The service was effective.

Staff were provided with a regular programme of training, supervision and appraisal for development and support.

The service was meeting the requirements of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff had an understanding of, the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

People were assisted to maintain their health by being provided with a balanced diet and having access to a range of healthcare professionals.

Caring

Good

Updated 27 September 2017

The service was caring.

Staff respected people’s privacy and dignity and knew people’s preferences well.

People living at the home, and their relatives, said staff were very caring in their approach.

Responsive

Good

Updated 27 September 2017

The service was responsive.

People’s care plans contained a range of information and had been reviewed to keep them up to date.

People living at the home, or their relatives, were confident in reporting concerns to the registered manager and felt they would be listened to.

Well-led

Good

Updated 27 September 2017

The service was well led.

Staff told us communication was good within the home. Staff meetings were held.

There were quality assurance and audit processes in place to make sure the home was running safely.

The service had a full range of policies and procedures available for staff so they had access to important information.