CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Longfield Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Risks such as falls, choking, pressure care and poor nutrition were assessed and managed. Inspectors found enough staff, safe recruitment, good medicines management and effective infection control.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff had relevant training and support. People were supported with food and drink, healthcare, communication and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and families described staff as kind, compassionate and respectful. Staff involved people in decisions, protected their privacy and supported their independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were personalised and updated when people's needs changed. People had activities, outings, family contact and opportunities to raise concerns.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found the home well managed, with approachable leaders, staff support and systems to monitor quality and learn from incidents and feedback.
What inspectors found, December 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
The inspection was unannounced. Inspectors visited on 20 November 2023 and gathered information during inspection activity from 15 to 29 November. They spoke with people living in the home, family members, staff and a visiting professional. They also reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
Inspectors found that people were safe, treated with kindness and supported by staff who knew their needs. There were enough staff, medicines were managed well, risks were assessed, and infection control arrangements were in place. People were supported with food, drink, healthcare, activities and end of life care.
The home was rated Good in Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the inspectors found consistently good care and management in the areas they assessed. The previous overall rating was also Good, published on 27 June 2017.
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Medicines were given safely and records showed people received them on time and as prescribed.
“Medicine records were maintained to a good standard, and demonstrated people received their medicines on time and as prescribed.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff knew people well and treated them as individuals. Inspectors saw staff protecting privacy, asking permission and supporting independence.
“Staff were compassionate, caring, gentle and kind.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described people's needs, preferences and life stories. Staff understood these details and adapted support when people's needs changed.
“People had person centred care plans in place describing their individual care and support needs.” from the report
Good family involvement
Families were welcomed and involved in care arrangements. The home held regular relatives' meetings and dealt with complaints promptly.
“People and family members told us they felt listened to and included in their relatives' care arrangements.” from the report
Strong management
The management team used audits, feedback and incident reviews to monitor care and make improvements. Staff said they could raise concerns.
“The provider had effective processes in place to monitor and manage the service and address any shortfalls.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and manage my relative's specific risks, such as falls, choking, pressure areas or poor nutrition?
- 02How will you keep my relative's care plan updated if their needs, preferences or communication needs change?
- 03What activities and outings would be suitable for my relative, and how will you support them to stay in contact with family and friends?
- 04How will you involve our family in decisions about care and end of life wishes?
- 05How can we raise a concern, and how will you tell us what action has been taken?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions and both the premises and care provided; infection prevention and control was specifically reviewed under Safe. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 December 2023 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, February 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control practices during the COVID-19 pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 2 February 2021. Inspectors checked how well the home prevented and controlled infections during the coronavirus pandemic.
The home was supporting contact with relatives through telephone and video calls, and by creating weekly newsletters with photos and updates. Staff also practised using protective equipment and responding if someone tested positive.
Inspectors were assured that the home used protective equipment safely, supported testing, followed shielding and distancing rules, and had measures to prevent and manage outbreaks. The home increased cleaning of frequently touched areas and carried out hand hygiene audits.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not give a full quality rating or ratings for all five areas of care.
Keeping families connected
Staff supported people to keep in touch with friends and relatives through telephone and video calls. The manager also created weekly newsletters with photos and updates from loved ones.
“Staff supported people to make regular telephone and video calls and the registered manager created individual weekly newsletters for people living in the service with photos and updates from their loved ones.” from the report
Staff infection control training
Staff practised putting on and removing protective equipment and discussed what to do if someone tested positive for COVID-19.
“These included practicing donning and doffing personal protective equipment (PPE) and talking through what actions staff would take if a person in the service tested positive for COVID-19.” from the report
Cleaning and hygiene
Cleaning was increased, including hourly cleaning of frequently touched areas. The manager also carried out regular hand hygiene audits.
“The provider had increased the frequency of cleaning in the service and implemented hourly cleaning for high touch areas such as door handles and hand rails.” from the report
Testing arrangements
The home had a dedicated testing area with guidance, hand-washing facilities and protective equipment supplies.
“The provider had created a testing area where staff completed their regular COVID-19 testing.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are the infection prevention and control measures described in this report being maintained now?
- 02How are residents currently supported to keep in regular contact with friends and relatives?
- 03How often are high-touch areas such as door handles and hand rails cleaned now?
- 04How are staff trained and checked in the safe use of personal protective equipment?
- 05What arrangements are in place for testing staff and residents and managing a possible infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; it did not provide a full rating or assess the other four key questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 February 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.
Every inspection of Longfield Care Home
3 rated inspections over 7 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- August 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2016Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 14 December 2010.
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
35 live-in carers within about an hour of Essex
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 25 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Not only was she professional, polite and efficient but she bought a lovely smile and laughter to my parents home.”
“She brought fun and stimulation into mums life.”
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.