CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Langfield Nursing and Residential Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control was safe. This included PPE, testing, cleaning, social distancing, admissions and outbreak planning.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Langfield Nursing and Residential Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control during a Covid-19 outbreak.
Inspectors visited on 21 December 2020. The visit was announced because the home had a Covid-19 outbreak. It was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, rather than a full inspection of the service.
Inspectors found good practice in the use of personal protective equipment, testing, cleaning, hand hygiene and social distancing. They were assured that the home had plans to manage infections, including separating areas and staff if needed.
Visits were restricted to exceptional circumstances during the outbreak and the home was developing a visiting area for when guidance allowed. People were supported to keep in touch with relatives through video messaging and social media.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give a graded overall rating, or ratings for most of the five key questions.
Personal protective equipment
Inspectors saw staff, managers and visitors using PPE correctly. They found robust procedures for using and disposing of it.
“Staff, management and visitors were using PPE correctly and there were robust procedures in place around the use of PPE.” from the report
Testing and infection planning
The home had regular testing arrangements and plans for preventing and managing outbreaks. Its infection control policy and risk assessments had been updated during the pandemic.
“The provider and registered manager had comprehensive processes to minimise the risk to people, staff and visitors from catching and spreading infection.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home clean and hygienic, with a designated cleaner.
“The home was clean and hygienic. The service had a designated cleaner.” from the report
Keeping in touch
Although visits were restricted during the outbreak, people were helped to contact friends and relatives using video messaging and social media.
“People were also supported in contacting their friends and relatives by the use of social media and video messaging services.” from the report
Staffing and training
Inspectors found enough staff to provide continuity of support and saw that staff had Covid-19 specialist training.
“There were sufficient staff to provide continuity of support and ensure safeguards were in place should there be a staff shortage.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01What are the current visiting rules, and how would visits work if there were an infection outbreak?
- 02How often are residents and staff tested now, and what happens after a positive result?
- 03How would you separate residents and staff if there was another widespread infection?
- 04What arrangements are in place to keep relatives informed during an outbreak or period of restricted visiting?
- 05Can you show me the latest full CQC ratings, as this inspection was not rated overall?
This was an announced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during a Covid-19 outbreak; the other key question ratings were not assessed. This explanation was written from the published report of 15 January 2021 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Langfield Nursing and Residential Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care, with some minor gaps in training and menu planning.
The inspection took place without notice on 17 and 18 September 2019. One inspector and two Experts by Experience spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and managers. They also observed care and checked care records, staff files and management information.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found people felt safe, medicines were given safely, staff were trained, and the home was clean. People were treated with kindness and respect, and their care plans reflected their needs and preferences.
The home had activities, access to health professionals and a complaints process. Managers carried out audits and acted on issues. Inspectors noted that 93% of mandatory training had been completed, some training was not always relevant, and the menu did not always reflect local tastes.
People felt safe
People and relatives told inspectors they felt safe. Staff understood safeguarding procedures and risks were identified and managed.
“People told us they felt safe at Langfield Nursing and Residential Home.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff respond kindly and reassure people when they were distressed. People were supported to make choices and their privacy and dignity were respected.
“When we observed interactions, we found staff were kind, caring and attentive.” from the report
Personalised care planning
Care plans included people's needs, preferences, interests and risks. They were reviewed when people's needs changed.
“Support plans were thorough and contained person-centred information detailing what was important to the individual.” from the report
Good management oversight
Managers were involved in day-to-day care and used audits to identify and address issues. People, relatives and staff found the manager approachable and supportive.
“The provider maintained a good oversight of the service which was well led by a manager who was highly involved in the day to day running of the service.” from the report
Activities and relationships
The home provided activities, trips and time for conversation. It also supported people's cultural and spiritual needs.
“The service employed activity coordinators who arranged activities which were enjoyable and encouraged and trips out either in groups or on a one to one basis.” from the report
Training was not complete
minorThe report records that 93% of mandatory training had been completed. Staff also said some training was not always relevant to the people they supported.
“A training record demonstrating that 93% of mandatory training had been completed.” from the report
Menu did not always reflect local tastes
minorPeople liked the food, but inspectors were told that the provider-planned menu did not always reflect local tastes and preferences.
“However, we were told the menu was planned by the provider and did not always reflect local tastes and preferences.” from the report
Some people had not seen their care plan
minorAlthough people and relatives were involved in assessments and reviews, not everyone inspectors spoke with had seen their care plan.
“although not all the people we spoke to had seen their care plan.” from the report
- 01What mandatory training is still outstanding, and when will it be completed?
- 02How do you make sure staff training is relevant to the needs of people living here?
- 03How can residents influence the menu, including local tastes and personal preferences?
- 04How will you make sure every resident can see and comment on their care plan?
- 05The report says the home was not providing nursing care. Can you meet my relative's nursing and personal care needs?
This was a planned, unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, and all five ratings remained Good from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 November 2019 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Langfield Nursing and Residential Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
Read what inspectors found at Langfield Nursing and Residential Home →
- November 2019Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Langfield Nursing and Residential Home →
- April 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- April 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 26 April 2016.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Rochdale
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £980 to £1,260 a week. 92 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.