Langley Court Rest Home

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good.

This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

There was a calm, warm and friendly atmosphere at the home. People looked comfortable and relaxed in the presence of staff and management. We observed staff responding to people’s need calmly and respectfully, staff knew people well and were able to anticipate their needs.

Feedback from peoples’ relatives was positive and relatives were complimentary about staff and highlighted how kind, friendly, professional and respectful staff were. Comments included, “They [care staff] are warm, friendly and professional” and “The carers are all very nice and very caring. Every time I have visited, I have seen them working very hard and are always busy.”

Healthcare professionals told us they were treated with respect, and staff always had time to support them when they were at the home. A professional told us, “I cannot fault how well they always treated me when I visited.”

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

Care records were person centred and demonstrated people were treated as individuals. The provider held regular meetings with people to seek their views on activities and food choices, which resulted in menu changes and a review of the daily activities schedule to meet people’s preferences. The Registered Manager described how the service had recently facilitated access for a person to attend their local church.

Protected characteristics were recorded in care records however they did not include sexuality. The provider had a sex, sexuality and relationship policy to support the development of this in practice; however, it had not yet been implemented in practice.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People were supported to have choice and control over their care and make day to day decisions. For example, people chose when to get up, when to sleep, what to eat and how they wanted to spend their time. People were encouraged to take part in activities and were able to spend time with others.

Peoples’ relatives felt their relatives had choice and control. A relative commented “Yes, they do ask for consent but also encourage my [relative] to do things for herself as well,” and another told us, “Yes, they do. They are very good like that and will explain to my [relative] what they are going to do. They will talk to [them] and continually reassure [them].”

Access to family, friends and visitors was welcomed and they were encouraged to be part of the home’s community. We observed people being taken out by friends and family during the site visit.

Care records showed people were supported with equipment such as walking aids, and had access to a wide range of services, including opticians and dentists, for example, to maximise their independence.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

We observed staff and managers responding to people’s needs in the moment in a calm and respectful manner. Staff were able to effectively deescalate a situation by knowing the person and how to regain calm.

Peoples’ relatives were positive when asked about how staff respond. A relative told us, “Whenever someone tries to get up and probably shouldn't, a carer always jumps in to help. They seem very competent in helping residents with walking aids” and another said, “My [relative] has a bell which [they] can't use, but they have given [them] a pressure mat. [They] can't get out of their chair anyway without help so [they] just calls out if [they] need assistance.”

The provider cared about and promoted the wellbeing of their staff, and supported and enabled staff to always deliver person-centred care

Staff told us the managers helped them to feel happy and safe at work. A member of staff said, “They really enjoyed working at the home and felt that the management were very visible and approachable.” Another member of staff said, “The managers are really supportive and understanding with my sometimes-flexible working pattern.” Managers routinely used group meetings to enquire about staff wellbeing as well as inviting staff feedback through an annual survey. The provider also ran an employee of the month scheme, who staff voted for; and the nominated colleague received a reward.