CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Langold View
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines arrangements, good infection control and appropriate risk assessments, although a few medicines signatures were missing.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were well trained and care plans reflected people's needs and choices. Some staff supervision records had gaps or were overdue.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were kind and respectful. People were involved in decisions, their privacy was respected and their independence was encouraged.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was personalised and people were supported with communication, activities, relationships and community life. End of life wishes had received minimal discussion.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers and staff understood their roles and staff felt able to raise concerns. Quality checks helped identify improvements, although some reviews of incident actions were not recorded.
What inspectors found, January 2022
Langold View rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some records and end of life planning needing improvement.
This was the first inspection since the home registered. Two inspectors visited on 8 December 2021. They spoke with people, staff, managers, a relative and health and social care professionals. They observed care and checked care records, medicines records, staff files, training records and management documents.
Inspectors found that people were safe and supported by enough trained staff. Medicines, infection control and safeguarding arrangements were generally well managed. Care was kind and person-centred. People had private apartments, were supported to make choices and were encouraged to use local shops, cafés and other community facilities.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The home had some minor shortfalls. A few medicines signatures were missing, some staff supervisions were overdue, reviews of incident actions were not always recorded, and there had been little discussion about end of life wishes.
Private space and independence
Each person had their own apartment and was supported to do as much as possible for themselves. The home also helped people make choices about daily life and going out.
“Each person had their own secure apartment with access to communal areas if they wished to use this.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors observed positive interactions. People were treated with dignity, involved in decisions and supported in ways suited to their communication needs.
“People were treated with dignity; their privacy was respected, and their independence was encouraged.” from the report
Community activities
People were supported to use local shops, cafés and other facilities, as well as taking part in activities and social events.
“People were encouraged to lead active lives, meet others and to feel part of their local community.” from the report
Trained staff
Staff had training in areas including learning disabilities, autism and swallowing difficulties. Inspectors found they had the skills needed to provide effective support.
“People were cared for and supported by staff who were well-trained, experienced and had the required skills to provide effective care and support.” from the report
Medicines signatures
needs fixingA few staff signatures were missing from medicines administration records. The manager said this would be addressed.
“We did note a few staff signatures missing on some entries.” from the report
Overdue supervision
minorSome staff supervision records were overdue or had gaps. A new process had been introduced to improve this.
“A small number of supervisions were overdue for some staff.” from the report
Incident follow-up records
needs fixingIncidents were investigated and actions were recorded, but records did not always show whether those actions had worked.
“However, we did note that a review of whether the actions taken had been effective had not been recorded.” from the report
End of life planning
needs fixingThere had been little discussion with people about end of life care and choices. The manager accepted this needed attention.
“We noted in people's records that there had been minimal discussion about this subject.” from the report
- 01What action has been taken to make sure every medicines administration entry is signed?
- 02Are all staff supervisions now up to date, and how is this checked?
- 03How do you record whether actions taken after accidents or incidents have been effective?
- 04How will you discuss end of life choices with my relative in a way they can understand?
- 05How will my relative be supported to use local shops, cafés, transport and other community facilities?
This was the first inspection and covered all five CQC questions, including the care provided, the premises and infection prevention and control arrangements. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 January 2022 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 Langold View
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- January 2022Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2019
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 November 2019.
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
75 live-in carers within about an hour of Nottinghamshire
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. 63 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
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.