You are here

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 1 September 2018

We carried out an inspection of 18 Langdon Park on 30 July 2018. The inspection was unannounced. We previously carried out an inspection of this service on 18 January 2016 where we found the service had met all the required standards. Since 3 July 2017 the service ceased being managed by Voyage 1 Ltd. and instead was managed by their new provider, Metropolitan Housing Trust Ltd. This inspection was the first inspection of the service under the management of the new provider.

18 Langdon Park is a home for up to seven people who have learning disabilities, some of whom have additional physical disabilities. At the time of our inspection there were seven people living in the home.

There was a registered manager in place in the home. 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 who lived at the home were protected from the risk of abuse happening to them. Some people did not communicate conversationally or in other conventional ways. However, those who could told us they felt safe and well looked after, and others were able to demonstrate through their body language and interaction with staff that they felt at ease, safe and well cared for.

We saw that people’s health and nutrition were regularly monitored. There were well established links with GP services and other community health services such as community learning disability teams.

Care records were individual to each person and contained information about people’s life history, their likes and dislikes, and information which would be helpful to hospitals or other health support services.

Staffing levels were managed flexibly to suit people's needs so that people received their care when they needed it. Staff had access to information, support and training that they needed to do their jobs well. The provider’s training programme was designed to meet the needs of people using the service so that staff had the knowledge and skills they required to care for people effectively.

There was an open and inclusive atmosphere in the service. Staff told us they enjoyed working in the home and found the changes to the service positive.

The provider carried out regular audits to monitor the quality of the service and to plan improvements. Action plans were used so the provider could monitor whether necessary changes were made.

Inspection areas



Updated 1 September 2018

The service was safe. People who lived at the home were protected from the risk of abuse happening to them, supported by clear policies and staff training. There were clear policies and procedures in place relating to safeguarding and whistleblowing.

Risk assessments of people�s activities, including the premises and environment supported people to be safe.

There were sufficient numbers of staff on duty to keep people safe.

Medicines were safely and securely stored in a locked medication cupboard and staff had received up to date training. The home had facilities to ensure the safe storage and administration of controlled medicines should this be required.



Updated 1 September 2018

The service was effective. People who lived in the home received care from staff who had had appropriate training and who were aware of good care practice. Staff received appropriate support and supervision.

Staff understood the requirements of legislation relating to the need for people to give consent and to act in their best interests when consent could not be given. People were involved in day to day decisions about their care.

People were supported to have sufficient food and drink. Staff had received training and were skilled in ensuring people with complex dietary needs were supported to enjoy their meals.

People were supported to have good access to health care, including specialist health care teams where appropriate. Staff were skilled and trained to ensure that people�s day to day health was monitored and supported.



Updated 1 September 2018

The service was caring. People had positive relationships with staff. People�s needs, including their health, disability and cultural needs were understood and supported by staff.

People were supported to express their views and make their own decisions. Staff could use a variety of approaches for those people who had difficulty communicating.

Staff respected people�s privacy, dignity and human rights. People had their individual wishes respected and families and visitors could visit. People�s individual support needs and how they liked to be supported were documented in up to date care records.



Updated 1 September 2018

The service was responsive. People received personalised care that was responsive to their needs. People�s needs were assessed and support plans drawn up which included the views and contributions of people.

There was a full programme of personalised activities for people which were prominently advertised and displayed.

The home had a complaints procedure that was understood by people and visitors.



Updated 1 September 2018

The service was well-led.

The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received.

People and staff were positive about the culture and atmosphere in the home.

The manager and staff maintained a focus on keeping up to date with best practice through participation in organisational meetings and forums for providers. Records and information were stored securely and safely.