Archived: Langdown House

Updated 29 May 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

The inspection team consisted of one adult social care inspector.

Service and service type: This service is a care home. It provides accommodation and personal care to people living in the service on one site.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection: We visited the service on 17 April 2019 and our inspection was unannounced.

What we did:

The registered manager sent us a provider information return (PIR). This is a document completed by the registered manager which contains information on how the service is developing and any planned improvements.

As part of the inspection we spoke with eight people who used the service and one relative. We also spoke with the registered manager, who became registered with CQC on the day of our inspection, the previous registered manager, the quality assurance advisor for Surrey County Council and three members of support staff. We sought feedback from a number of healthcare professionals and spoke with one. We looked at three people’s care records and looked at three staff files including training and recruitment. We reviewed the service’s accidents and incidents, audits and complaints policies.

Updated 29 May 2019

About the service:

Langdown House 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. At the time of our inspection 26 people were living in four individual houses in the cul de sac. Langdown House consists of four separate houses, each containing seven bedrooms. Langdown House supports people with different needs and backgrounds, including people with learning disabilities, mental health needs, autism spectrum disorders and people who display behaviours that challenge others.

The service is run by YMCA London South West, a charitable organisation responsible for managing this service and another care home in the county of Surrey. However, the staff were employees of Surrey County Council. The two organisations worked in partnership with different roles and responsibilities for managing the service.

People’s experience of using this service:

The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.

Langdown House was made up of four small houses. Each of these had a staff team led by a senior support worker. The service was overseen by a deputy manager and a registered manager.

People and relatives spoke highly of the service they received from Langdown House. The service had strong person-centred values and placed people’s wellbeing at the heart of their work. People received personalised support which met their needs and preferences.

During our inspection we identified a restriction was in place for people surrounding the access to the fridge and freezer at night time. This was discussed with the registered manager and the restriction was lifted immediately after the inspection where this restriction was not specifically necessary. The registered manager’s understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 was thorough and other than this, people were supported in the least restrictive way possible.

Staff knew people well and worked hard to enable them to share their views, make choices and live active lives as independently as possible. The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support in the following ways; people’s support was focused on them having as many opportunities and choices as possible.

People were fully involved in the planning and delivery of their care and this was done in a way which encouraged independence. People’s care plans contained personalised information which detailed how they wanted their care to be delivered.

Risks to people’s health, safety and wellbeing were assessed and acted upon. We found a risk assessment for one person had not been completed to give staff clear direction on how to minimise the risk to this person. However, staff knew people’s needs well and were taking action to protect people. Following our inspection the registered manager sent us copies of the updated risk assessment they had put in place for this person.

People were protected from potential abuse by staff who had received training and were confident in raising concerns. There was a thorough recruitment process in place that checked potential staff were safe to work with people who may be vulnerable.

People were supported by kind and caring staff who worked hard to promote their independence and sense of wellbeing. Staff were provided with the training, supervision and support they needed to care for people well.

There was strong leadership at the service. People and staff spoke highly of the management team and there was a positive culture at the service with people and staff feeling their voices were listened to.

There were effective quality assurance systems in place to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of the service provided.

More information is in the full report

Rating at last inspection: This service was last inspected on 23 and 30 August 2016 and was rated good overall and in every key question. The report was published 12 October 2016.

Why we inspected: This inspection was scheduled based on the registration date of the service.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor the intelligence we receive about the service. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.