CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Longcroft
Not yet rated: the CQC has not published a rated inspection for this home, which is usual for a new registration.
What inspectors found, April 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some risk assessments needing more detail.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 6 March 2019. One inspector spoke with four people living at the home, two managers and five staff. They also reviewed care and staff records, checked recruitment, training and staffing, and looked around the building.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and comfortable. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment checks, safe medicines practice, good training and clean surroundings.
Care was planned around each person's needs, choices and goals. Inspectors found kind interactions, good links with health and social care services, activities to build skills and independence, and systems for listening to people's views.
One shortfall was found in risk assessments. They did not always give staff enough detail about specific risks. The management team provided a new, more detailed form 24 hours after the inspection. The previous inspection, published on 2 March 2017, was also rated Good.
Kind and respectful staff
Staff were consistently observed to be caring and friendly. People said their privacy, dignity and personal space were respected.
“We observed staff consistently interacted with those who lived at Longcroft in a caring and friendly way.” from the report
Personalised support
People were involved in setting goals and planning their support. Records focused on building independence and used people's preferences and life histories.
“Documentation evidenced each person was at the heart of their support planning, which focused on maximising their independence.” from the report
Good staff preparation
Staff had training and qualifications relevant to their roles, including additional training when people's personal care needs increased.
“Staff had completed nationally recognised health and social care qualifications and were required to undertake a variety of courses specific to their role.” from the report
Activities and independence
People could use the woodwork shop and gardening facilities and take part in music, life skills, voluntary work and college courses.
“There was an extensive woodwork shop and gardening facilities on site, which were widely used by people at the home.” from the report
Good links with other services
The home worked with health and social care professionals and made timely referrals when people needed further support.
“We noted, where required, people were referred with a timely approach to other services to meet their ongoing needs.” from the report
Risk assessments needed more detail
needs fixingSome risk assessments did not fully explain specific risks or give staff enough guidance. Managers said they would improve this and showed inspectors a more robust form the following day.
“We found information did not always fully guide staff to specific risks.” from the report
- 01How are the new, more detailed risk assessment forms now being used and reviewed?
- 02How would the stepped admission process work for my relative?
- 03What activities and training opportunities would be available to help my relative build independence?
- 04How would my relative's mental health needs be supported, and which health professionals would be involved?
- 05How can my relative raise a concern or complaint, and how would the home respond?
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, including care, staffing, records, medicines, the building and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 April 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.
What inspectors found, March 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised support with strong management and no breaches reported.
This was an announced inspection on 18 January 2017. One inspector spoke with six residents, six staff members, two volunteers and managers. They reviewed care records, staff recruitment records and management records, and observed daily interactions.
The home supported up to 14 men with mental health illness. There were 13 residents at the inspection. Inspectors found enough skilled staff, safe medicine systems, detailed risk assessments and staff who understood safeguarding.
Residents were treated with respect and supported to make choices, build skills and work towards more independent living. Care plans reflected people's goals and preferences. Residents could take part in activities, maintain relationships and raise complaints.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspection found the home was meeting the relevant standards at that time, although a rating is not a guarantee that every future experience will be the same.
Safe staffing and risk planning
There were enough staff to provide support, including one-to-one help when needed. Risks were assessed and plans were reviewed with the person concerned.
“Staffing levels were sufficient with an appropriate skill mix to meet the needs of people supported by the service.” from the report
Safe medicines
Staff were trained and checked for competence. Inspectors found medicines were given as prescribed and controlled drug records were accurate.
“This meant people had received their medication as prescribed.” from the report
Respectful, personal care
Staff knew residents well and supported their wishes, privacy and dignity. Care plans were reviewed with residents and updated regularly.
“Staff maintained people's privacy and dignity throughout our visit.” from the report
Support for independence
The home helped residents develop cooking, money management and daily living skills. It also supported education, employment, voluntary work and hobbies.
“We found Longcroft supported people to be independent so they were confident when moved into the community for independent living.” from the report
Open management
The manager used audits, staff meetings and resident meetings to monitor the service and make changes. Residents were encouraged to share their views and complaints.
“The registered manager consulted with the organisation, people they supported and relatives for their input on how the service could continually improve.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are each resident's risks, including risks in the community, reviewed with them now?
- 02How do you check that staff remain trained and competent to support mental health needs, aggression or suicidal thoughts?
- 03How are residents currently supported to manage medicines safely, including self-medication where appropriate?
- 04What current activities, education, employment or daily living support are available for someone working towards independence?
- 05How are residents and families asked for feedback, and how are complaints recorded and followed up?
This was an announced inspection of the overall service and all five CQC questions, including care records, recruitment records, management systems, observations and discussions with residents, staff, volunteers and professionals. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 March 2017 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 Longcroft
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- April 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 July 2012.
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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.