The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Langfield Nursing and Residential Home

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Wood Street, Middleton, Manchester, Greater Manchester, M24 5QH (0161) 653 5319

Provided and run by:
St Andrews Care GRP Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See old profile

All Inspections

29 September 2015

During a routine inspection

Langfield Nursing and Residential Home is registered to care for up to 52 older people with nursing and personal care needs. It is a purpose built home situated in a residential area of Middleton, close to shops and local transport.

We last inspected this service ion 20 June 2014 when the service met all the regulations we inspected. We undertook this unannounced inspection on 29 September 2015.

The service did not have a registered manager. The person in charge had applied to register with the Care Quality Commission. 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 a legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People who used the service told us that Langfield was a safe place to live. Safeguarding procedures were robust and members of staff understood their role in safeguarding vulnerable people from harm.

We found that recruitment procedures were thorough and protected people from the employment of unsuitable staff.

The home was clean and appropriate procedures were in place for the prevention and control of infection.

Members of staff told us they were supported by management and received regular training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge to provide effective care for people who used the service.

Members of staff had also been trained in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) so they knew when an application to protect a person’s best interests should be made and how to submit one.

Most of the people we asked told us the meals were good. Snacks and drinks were available between meals. We found that people’s weight and nutrition was monitored so that prompt action could be taken if any problems were identified.

People were registered with a GP and had access to a full range of other health and social care professionals.

We saw that members of staff were courteous and treated people with respect. People who used the service were nicely dressed and looked smart.

We saw that care plans included information about people’s personal preferences which enabled staff to provide care that was person centred and promoted people’s dignity and independence.

Leisure activities were routinely organised at the home. People using the service were given a copy of the activities programme every month to enable them to choose what they wanted to do.

A copy of the complaints procedure was displayed in the home. People who used the service and their relatives told us they would make a complaint if necessary.

People who used the service were given the opportunity to express their views about the service at meetings held regularly to discuss the service provided and activities.

Members of staff told us they liked working at the home and found the manager approachable and supportive.

Visiting professionals told us the home was managed effectively.

We saw that systems were in place for the manager to monitor the quality and safety of the care provided.

20 June 2014

During an inspection in response to concerns

The purpose of this inspection was to investigate concerns that had been brought to our attention anonymously. The person alleged there was no cook working at the home and that care staff or management were preparing and cooking the meals. It was also alleged that the meals were of a poor standard. A further allegation was that there was an insufficient number of care staff on duty, especially during the night.

During this inspection we also looked to see if improvements had been made to the care records as during the last inspection of December 2013 it was identified that they were not accurate.

We considered all the evidence we had gathered under the outcomes we inspected. We used the information to answer the five questions we always ask;

Is the service safe?

Is the service caring?

Is the service effective?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service well led?

Below is a summary of what of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with three people who used the service, speaking with the cook, speaking with management and from looking at records.

Is the service safe?

People were protected against the risk of unsafe or inappropriate care. This was because their care records were detailed and provided good information to guide staff on the care, treatment and support required.

People were provided with a choice of suitable and nutritious food and drinks to ensure their nutritional needs were met. People we spoke with told us, 'The food is really good and there's plenty of it' and 'No problems with the food. It is really nice and we always have a choice'.

Sufficient staff were provided at all times to help ensure the needs of people who used the service were met.

Is the service caring?

The people we spoke with were complimentary about the care provided. Comments made included, "The carers do a good job and they are all very nice".

People's care records showed that their preferences, likes and dislikes had been clearly documented and their care and support had been provided in accordance with their wishes.

Is the service effective?

We saw that people's health and care needs had been assessed and detailed care plans were in place.

Is the service responsive?

Information in the care records showed the staff at the home involved, where necessary, other health and social care professionals in the care and support of the people who used the service.

Is the service well led?

The home had a manager who was registered with the Care Quality Commission who had the necessary skills and experience to undertake the role.

21 November and 2 December 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we spoke with seven people who used the service and three relatives. People told us “Staff are brilliant, nothing is too much trouble” and “Everything about the place is good”. Professionals visiting the home also made positive comments about the service. We found that people's care needs were assessed and their care plans were regularly reviewed.

We saw that the provision of food was good, with well-balanced menus that offered choice. People's dietary requirements had been considered and people told us “They’re helping me put weight on, the food’s good”. Another person told us “The food is excellent. Too good”.

We saw that there were adequate numbers of qualified and skilled staff to meet people’s needs. The care we observed was provided to people in a calm, patient and unhurried manner.

We saw that the Provider had an effective complaints policy in place and that complaints information was available to people.

We found that although the Provider had some systems in place to monitor the quality of people’s care records, this was not a robust system. We saw that care records were not always complete and accurate.

1 October 2012

During a routine inspection

During our visit we spoke with 4 people who live at Langfield and three visitors. People living at the home told us, “I’m very happy here, it’s like home from home”, “There’s plenty to do”, “The girls (care staff) are smashing” and “We all have our individual tastes and they know what we like”.

Visitor’s comments also included; “It’s reassuring, they keep in contact with me”, “There’s plenty going on, the activities seem to have improved” and “We’re always made very welcome”. We saw that relatives and carers meetings were planned and dates and minutes displayed on a notice board.

We observed that staff interacted with in a positive manner. They offered support to people in a kind and considerate way ensuring their dignity was respected. We observed staff talking sensitively and involving people in decisions about their support so that their wishes and preferences were taken into consideration.

We were told that Langfield had a high retention of staff rate. Staff spoken with confirmed this and also told us that they received regular training updates. This included training specific to individuals needs of people such as dementia care. One staff member spoken with told us, “We work well as a team”, “The communication is good, you know what is going on” and “If I’m not sure I would just ask the senior”. One of the visitors we spoke with also commented, “The staff are a settled team, they’ve all been here a while” and “The carers are wonderful”.