Archived: Langley Park Care Home

Langley Park care home is a residential care home providing personal care to 41 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. Nursing care is not provided. The service can support up to 46 people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People felt safe and secure living in the home. People and their relatives were very happy with the service and had good relationships with staff members. There was a warm and welcoming atmosphere.

There were enough staff to meet people's needs. Safe recruitment procedures were followed. Medicines were managed effectively. Staff followed infection prevention and control guidelines. The premises were well maintained, clean and tidy.

People were supported by kind and caring staff. People and relatives said the quality of care was excellent as people were treated with respect and valued as individuals. Professionals gave us excellent feedback about the service.

Staff sought people's consent before providing care and support. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs and preferences. Relatives told us this improved people’s wellbeing. Staff knew people's needs well. People and relatives knew how to raise concerns but nobody we spoke with had any. There were a wide range of activities for people to enjoy both inside the home and in the local community.

People and relatives felt the service was well managed. An effective quality assurance process was in place. People and relatives were regularly consulted about the quality of the service via meetings and surveys. Staff were involved in the ongoing development and improvement of the service through regular meetings.

There was a positive culture and ethos at the service which was driven by the management team. The registered manager led by example and actively promoted responsive care which improved people's quality of life.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was outstanding (published 24 July 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Following our last inspection in March 2015 Langley Park was rated overall as “Good”.

There was a registered manager in post. 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.

We found staff in the home were extremely caring. People who used the service, relatives and visiting professionals were highly complementary about the staff team. They used words such as, “Brilliant” or “Outstanding” to describe them.

Staff had very positive relationships with people and their relatives. We found staff knew people exceptionally well and had found ways to engage with people which promoted their emotional and physical well-being to a high degree. We saw every member of staff approached people with kindness. Staff anticipated people’s needs and offered their help.

We saw the staff in the home provided people with meaningful activities which met every aspect of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). The activities and events in the home permitted relatives to have social times with the people who used the service. We found staff had successfully engaged people in a wide variety of activities which met their preferences and reflected their individual preferred lifestyles. The home was full of laughter. Music was used to enhance people’s emotional well-being and this was infectious through the home. Relatives described their family members as being “Happy” and “Content.”

People received consistent, personalised care and support which was documented in detail in people’s care records. These were regular reviewed and updated when people’s needs changed. Staff demonstrated they clearly understood people’s needs and were able to provide several examples of how they delivered individualised care to each person who used the service.

Visiting professionals told us they were confident in the care provided to people at the end of their life. One professional said, “They give people very good end of life care.” Relatives had sent cards to the home to say “Thank you” to the staff for providing sympathetic and thoughtful care when people who used the service approached the end of their life.

We found if relatives raised any concerns or wished to discuss issues these were promptly addressed by the registered manager. There had been no complaints in the last 12 months. Seven relatives had used a web based review site to leave comments about the service. All of their reviews highly praised the staff.

We checked people’s medicines records and talked to staff about how they administered people’s medicines. We found people received their medicines in a safe manner. Guidance was given to staff on signs to look out for if people were in pain.

We found regular checks were carried out on the building to ensure people lived in a safe and secure environment. People had personal emergency evacuation plans in place which were accessible to emergency services to help them locate people in the building and support them to leave.

The registered manager maintained safe staffing levels. Relatives told us they thought there were enough staff on duty. We found staff were able to respond quickly to people’s care needs.

Robust checks were carried out on staff to ensure they had the appropriate skills, experiences and attitudes to work in the home. Once recruited, staff were supported through internal and external training, supervision and appraisals which meant people in the home were cared for by staff who were competent in their roles.

People were weighed on a weekly basis and their weights were given to the kitchen staff. Kitchen staff told us they meant they could see if anyone had lost weight and could provide additional calories to the person to try and reverse any unnecessary weight loss.

The service was led-led. People, relatives, staff and other professionals were complimentary about the registered manager. Everyone felt the registered manager was approachable.

We saw the provider’s monitoring systems were used in the home. These included audits to assess and monitor the quality of the home. The registered manager used a daily walk around the home to monitor the environment in order to organise any remedial repairs.

The relationships between staff and the people who they cared for were good and personal support was provided in a way that promoted and protected their privacy and dignity. This was confirmed when we spoke with people who used the service and to people's relatives.

A visiting professional told us the care provided at the home was very good.

Suitable arrangements were in place for protecting people from abuse. There was a competent staff team who had the training, skills and experience to meet the specific conditions of the people they supported.

Those people living in the home we spoke with said that they were happy with the service provided by the staff. One person told us, when asked about the way they were treated, 'If you're talking about dignity and kindness they're tip top' and '100%'.

One visitor told us she thought the home had 'looked after' their relative really well and that she was 'really pleased' with the care. Another visitor, when asked about the care being given to their relative, said 'The staff asked about me about the kind of things that my relative liked to do and the kind of food she likes.' All of the relatives we spoke with had been involved in developing the initial care plan for the people who lived here and were happy with the content of the documents.

Staff were given relevant training to equip them for their role and were being supported through appraisals and supervisions. They told us they were confident in their job and would go to senior staff and manager for guidance and advice.

We spoke with a small group of people sitting in a lounge. They told us they were very happy with the service and how much they appreciated the staff and the manager. They told us the food was 'excellent' and one suggested, 'If you can stay you should have your dinner as it's really nice.'