Langdon Community is registered to provide personal care to people in their own homes. The service is run by a Jewish organisation and specialises in providing support to people with a learning difficulties. Support is provided both to individuals and to people living in small group settings. At the time of our inspection there were 38 people using the service.
This was an announced inspection which took place on 10 and 11 August 2016.
The service had a registered manager in place. 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 we spoke with were very complimentary about the registered manager
People who used the service and their relatives told us they felt safe with staff from Langdon Community.Recruitment procedures were in place which ensured staff had been safely recruited. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. Staff and managers knew the people who used the service well.
Staff had received training in safeguarding adults. They were aware of the correct action to take if they witnessed or suspected any abuse. Staff were aware of the whistleblowing (reporting poor practice) policy in place in the service.
There was a safe system in place for managing people’s medicines.
People’s needs were assessed before they started to use the service. Care records were very detailed and person centred and contained information about people’s health and social care needs. Care records were written using very respectful terms. They provided staff with sufficient detail to guide them on how best to support people and understand how people communicated.
Care records were regularly reviewed and updated. This helped to ensure they fully reflected people’s needs.
The service had a positive approach to risk management. Person centred risk assessments were in place that supported staff to manage risk in a positive way. They also gave staff guidance on how to promote the person’s independence whilst managing risks.
The service placed great importance on promoting people’s independence and identified people’s preferences and routines. Care records contained information on what people could do for themselves, skills they wanted to learn and how staff could promote people's independence.
The service had detailed guidance for staff on how to support people when they showed behaviour that challenged the service. Records contained information about what may make someone upset or angry and guided staff in how to respond, what to say and what to do to help the person and diffuse situations. This included understanding how the person communicated and guided staff on how to respond. The service also recognised and valued people's own communication methods including using signs, gestures and sounds.
People were supported to access a wide range of activities, hobbies, work placements and places of interest to them.
The provider was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). Staff were able to tell us how they supported people to make their own decision. The managers in the service were aware of the process to follow should a person lack the capacity to consent to their care.
Staff received an induction and were provided with a wide range of training that would help them carry out their roles effectively. Training was also given about people’s health conditions and equipment that people used. Staff had regular supervision and team meetings and told us they felt very well supported by the organisation and managers from the service. Staff told us they enjoyed the work they did and enjoyed working for the organisation.
People had access to a range of health care professionals. We saw that detailed records were kept of any visits or appointments.
All the people we spoke with were positive about the service and the caring attitude of the staff and managers from the service. We found that the registered manager and staff spoke about people in compassionate and caring ways. They treated people with dignity and respect and were encouraging and enthusiastic when talking with people.
People’s religious and cultural needs were respected. They were supported to observe and practise their culture and religion.
Managers of the service used a robust system of quality assurance and audits and used this to help improve the quality of the service provided. There was a complaints procedure for people to voice their concerns.
The service had a range of ways of involving people and getting their ideas for how the service could be improved.
The service had notified CQC of any accidents, serious incidents, safeguarding allegations and DoLS applications as they are required to do.