You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 29 May 2019

About the service:

Langdown House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. At the time of our inspection 26 people were living in four individual houses in the cul de sac. Langdown House consists of four separate houses, each containing seven bedrooms. Langdown House supports people with different needs and backgrounds, including people with learning disabilities, mental health needs, autism spectrum disorders and people who display behaviours that challenge others.

The service is run by YMCA London South West, a charitable organisation responsible for managing this service and another care home in the county of Surrey. However, the staff were employees of Surrey County Council. The two organisations worked in partnership with different roles and responsibilities for managing the service.

People’s experience of using this service:

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

Langdown House was made up of four small houses. Each of these had a staff team led by a senior support worker. The service was overseen by a deputy manager and a registered manager.

People and relatives spoke highly of the service they received from Langdown House. The service had strong person-centred values and placed people’s wellbeing at the heart of their work. People received personalised support which met their needs and preferences.

During our inspection we identified a restriction was in place for people surrounding the access to the fridge and freezer at night time. This was discussed with the registered manager and the restriction was lifted immediately after the inspection where this restriction was not specifically necessary. The registered manager’s understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 was thorough and other than this, people were supported in the least restrictive way possible.

Staff knew people well and worked hard to enable them to share their views, make choices and live active lives as independently as possible. The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support in the following ways; people’s support was focused on them having as many opportunities and choices as possible.

People were fully involved in the planning and delivery of their care and this was done in a way which encouraged independence. People’s care plans contained personalised information which detailed how they wanted their care to be delivered.

Risks to people’s health, safety and wellbeing were assessed and acted upon. We found a risk assessment for one person had not been completed to give staff clear direction on how to minimise the risk to this person. However, staff knew people’s needs well and were taking action to protect people. Following our inspection the registered manager sent us copies of the updated risk assessment they had put in place for this person.

People were protected from potential abuse by staff who had received training and were confident in raising concerns. There was a thorough recruitment process in place that checked potential staff were safe to work with people who may be vulnerable.

People were supported by kind and caring staff who worked hard to promote their independence and sense of wellbeing. Staff were provided with the training, supervis

Inspection areas



Updated 29 May 2019

The service was safe

Details are in our Safe findings below.



Updated 29 May 2019

The service was effective

Details are in our Effective findings below.



Updated 29 May 2019

The service was caring

Details are in our Caring findings below.



Updated 29 May 2019

The service was responsive

Details are in our Responsive findings below.



Updated 29 May 2019

The service was well-led

Details are in our Well-Led findings below.