Archived: Langdale View

Updated 20 November 2020

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

This was a targeted inspection looking at the infection control and prevention measures the provider has in place. As part of CQC’s response to the coronavirus pandemic we are conducting a review of infection control and prevention measures in care homes.

The service had been identified for use by the Local Authority as a designated care setting in response to the Winter Plan for people discharged from hospital with a positive COVID-19 status. This inspection was to ensure that the service was compliant with infection control and prevention measures.

This inspection took place on 13 November 2020 and was announced.

Updated 20 November 2020

This inspection took place on 10 and 26 January 2018 and was unannounced.

Langdale View is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Langdale View provides nursing and personal care for up to 36 older people. Some of the people at the home are living with dementia. The home is located in Leicester and accommodation is provided over three floors with a lift for access. At the time of our inspection there were 35 people accommodated at the home.

The service had a registered manager. This 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 told us they felt safe at the home because there were always staff on hand to support and care for them. Staff understood the importance of protecting people from harm including those who might not be able to say if something was wrong. If people were at risk due to their mental health or physical disabilities staff took action to minimise this.

Staff treated people with kindness and compassion. They valued people as individuals and were interested in them and their lives. The staff team was multicultural, reflective of the local area’s rich cultural heritage, and had a positive approach to diversity. People's privacy, dignity and independence was respected and promoted.

People said the home had a happy and calm atmosphere. Staff said they enjoyed working there because they were able to get to know the people they supported as individuals and build up relationships with them. The staff were well-trained and knowledgeable about the needs of the people they were supporting.

There were enough staff employed to meet people’s needs. Communal areas were well-staffed and if people were in their bedrooms staff regularly checked on them. Staff had time to assist people with their needs and also to socialise with them and support them to take part in activities. Staff were safely recruited in line with the providers' safe recruitment policies and procedures.

Medicines were stored securely and safely administered. People were protected by the prevention and control of infection. If any accidents or incidents occurred lessons were learnt and action taken to reduce risk in future.

People were supported to eat, drink and maintain a balanced diet. People had a choice of dishes, portions were of a good size, and the food well-prepared. If people needed assistance with their meals staff provided this.

Care plans were personalised and gave clear information to staff about each person's specific needs and how they liked to be supported. People were satisfied with how their personal care was provided. Staff ensured people had regular access to GPs and other healthcare professionals as required. Staff understood the importance of people consenting to their care.

People were able to take part in activities of their choice. People had individual activity profiles setting out their hobbies, interests, and what activities they would like to take part in. Recent group and one-to-one activities had included baking, watercolour painting, visiting entertainers, board games, and coffee mornings run by a befriending service.

Surveys were used to gather the views of people, relatives and visiting professionals. The results of these showed a high level of satisfaction with the home. People, relatives and staff were also invited to share their views at one-to-one and group meetings with managers.

The providers and registered managers monitored the quality of the home and took action to bring about improvements where necessary. At the time of our inspection they were engaged in two projects run by a local university, one to improve outcomes for people living with dementia, and the other to reduce the risk of falls. These projects were an example of the continuous learning and improvement taking place at the home.