We carried out a review of the data available to us about 1 Longmore Road on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about 1 Longmore Road, you can give feedback on this service.
Why the service remained Good:
The staff team were caring and respectful and provided support in the way people preferred. Their right to confidentiality was protected and their dignity and privacy were respected. People were enabled and encouraged to develop and maintain their independence wherever possible.
People received care and support that was personalised to meet their individual needs. People were supported to maintain relationships with those important to them. The service provided access to local events to enhance social activities. This meant people had access to activities that took into account their individual interests and links with different communities.
Staff had a good understanding of how to keep people safe and protect them from abuse. Personal and environmental risks to the safety of people, staff and visitors had been assessed and actions had been taken to minimise those risks. We have made a recommendation that the service review their fridge food storage arrangements in line with current best practice for care homes.
Recruitment processes were in place to make sure, as far as possible, that people were protected from staff being employed who were not suitable. There were sufficient numbers of staff and medicines were stored and handled correctly.
People benefitted from a staff team that was well trained and supervised. We have made a recommendation that future ongoing staff training be updated in line with the latest best practice guidelines for social care staff.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible, the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. People were supported to eat and drink enough and their health and social care needs were met.
People were relaxed and there was an open and inclusive atmosphere at the service. Staff were happy in their jobs and there was a good team spirit. They felt supported by the management and said the training they received enabled them to meet people's needs choices and preferences. Quality assurance systems were in place to monitor the quality of service being delivered and the running of the service.
Further information is in the detailed findings in the full report.
This inspection took place on the 22 September 2015 and was unannounced.
1 Longmore Road is a care home which is registered to provide care (without nursing) for up to seven people with a learning disability. The home is a large detached building within Reading close to local shops and other amenities. People have their own bedrooms and use of communal areas that included an enclosed private garden. The people living in the home needed care and support from staff at all times and have a range of care needs.
There is a full-time registered manager. 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 use the service had a range of communication skills. These ranged from verbal to limited verbal communication and other methods such as pictures to communicate their needs and wishes which were understood by staff.
People were provided with effective care from a dedicated staff team who had received support through supervision, staff meetings and training. Their care plans detailed how they wanted their needs to be met. Risk assessments identified risks associated with personal and specific behavioural and or health related issues. They helped to promote people’s independence whilst minimising the risks. Staff treated people with kindness and respect and had regular contact with people’s families to make sure they were fully informed about the care and support their relative received.
People were encouraged to live a fulfilled life with activities of their choosing. Their families were encouraged to be fully involved at the reviews of their support needs. People’s families told us that they were very happy with the care their relatives received and had noted marked improvements of ensuring they were fully informed since the registered manager came to the service.
The recruitment and selection process helped to ensure people were supported by staff of good character. There was a sufficient amount of qualified and trained staff to meet people’s needs safely. Staff knew how to recognise and report any concerns they had about the care and welfare of people to protect them from abuse.
The service had taken the necessary action to ensure they were working in a way which recognised and maintained people’s rights. They understood the relevance of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and consent issues which related to the people in their care. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 legislation provides a legal framework that sets out how to act to support people who do not have capacity to make a specific decision. DoLS provide a lawful way to deprive someone of their liberty, provided it is in their own best interests or is necessary to keep them from harm.
Staff were supported to receive the training and development they needed to care for and support people’s individual needs. People received good quality care. The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received. There were various formal methods used for assessing and improving the quality of care.
People told us care workers communicated effectively with people to make sure care was provided in accordance with their wishes. We saw people who lived in the home consented to care provided by care staff. We found evidence of best interest decisions meetings made regarding people's care. A relative told us the home delivered the care their relative needed and the service responded to their health needs promptly. They said the home was always kept clean.
Care workers told us people's needs were reviewed regularly. They said the service was responsive to people's needs.
Everyone we spoke with said there had been no infections among people who lived in the home other than individuals with coughs, colds or flu. Staff told us precautions were taken to reduce cross contamination when people were ill. We saw the home was clean and there were appropriate materials available for hand washing and delivering care hygienically.
Care workers said they had received appraisals from their manager. They also said there were regular supervision sessions which allowed them to identify training and support requirements. We found care workers received mandatory training.
We saw care plans and other records such as staff rotas were up to date and contained appropriate information.