Langley Lodge Nursing Home

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way which was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. Risks were assessed and people were supported to make choices that balanced risks of harm with positive choices about their lives. Staff had been supported to complete training and develop the skills they needed to support people safely. There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. Staff were employed following the appropriate recruitment checks being completed.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

People were protected from the risk of abuse and said they felt safe living at the service. One person said, “All staff are good very polite. It feels safe here for me so must be safe for other people.” Another person said, “I feel safe here comfortable and happy. There is always somebody around, I felt lonely at home.”

We observed staff supporting people safely.

The registered manager told us they had safeguarding policies and procedures in place and had a procedure for ‘whistle blowing’. Staff received information on safeguarding in their staff induction booklets and discussed safeguarding in staff meetings or supervision. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making particular decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The MCA requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to take particular decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the MCA. In care homes, and some hospitals, this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). DoLS application had been made and legal authorisations were in place where required. Staff understood the need to gain consent from people for care and to encourage people to make decisions for themselves. Where people were unable to do this best interest decisions were in place. Where family members held lasting power of attorney for health, welfare and finance copies of these obtained to show their legal authorisation to be involved in peoples care.

Staff had received training in how to safeguard people and knew how to raise any concerns with management or external agencies. The registered manager had raised safeguarding concerns appropriately and had worked with the local authority to investigate these to ensure people were being safeguarded.

People were involved in planning their care and managing risks. Care plan and risk assessments were person centred and aim to provide positive outcomes for people whilst maintaining their choice and independence. One person said, “What the staff have done for me has been extraordinary. They have got me walking again without any pains in my legs.” Another person said, “I felt like I was going to fall this morning, the staff came and helped me to walk this morning no problem at all.”

Risk assessments and care plans helped to mitigate the risks to people by providing guidance to staff on how to support people safely. The service had adequate supplies of individual equipment needed to support people’s care needs such as hoists or specialist beds. There were detailed personal evacuation plans to safely evacuate the building in an emergency.

We observed staff enabling people to communicate their needs and meet those needs safely.

Staff had received the appropriate training to support people safely. Staff we spoke with knew people well and how they wished to be supported whilst maintaining their independence.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The registered manager told us they felt very lucky as they had a consistent staff team working at the service and good staff retention. The registered manager told us they recruited staff to specific roles rather than expecting care staff to take on additional roles such as cleaning or kitchen duties. This meant care staff could solely focus on giving care. Appropriate checks were in place before staff started work including providing full work histories, references and a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check. DBS provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the Police National Computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions. Staff had received training to enable them to have the skills and knowledge they needed to support people. Nursing staff had their competencies to perform tasks checked and were supported to revalidate their professional qualification. Staff had supervision to discuss their training and support needs and regular staff meetings.

We observed people being supported by skilled staff who understood their individual health and wellbeing needs.

Staff told us they felt supported by the management and were provided with the correct training to give them the skills they needed to work with people. One member of staff said, “I am up to date with my training we do online training and have had face to face training with a nurse. During staff meetings and supervision, we discuss any concerns or improvements. I love working here everyone gets on as a team,”

People and relatives were very complimentary of the staff and the support they received. One person said, “I cannot fault the staff they are all very good.” Another person said, “You could not wish for better staff, they are here if you need them but not in an interfering way. I like my independence as well.”

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.