CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Longhouse
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, November 2017
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, caring and personalised respite care, with some records still being improved.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 18 October 2017. One inspector spoke with people, staff, the manager, relatives and health care professionals. They also checked care records, medicines, staffing, recruitment and quality checks.
The home supported up to six people with learning and/or physical disabilities for respite stays. Inspectors found that people’s risks, preferences and support needs were recorded. Staff knew people well, treated them respectfully and helped them make choices.
The home had enough staff, safe medicines systems and suitable recruitment checks. Relatives and health care professionals spoke positively about the care and communication. The home was rated Good in all five areas and overall, the same as at the September 2015 inspection.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw friendly interactions and found that staff gave people time, encouragement and choices. Privacy and dignity were respected.
“We saw many warm and friendly interactions between staff and people.” from the report
Good communication
Staff kept relatives and carers informed about changes in people’s wellbeing. Health professionals praised how promptly staff contacted them.
“Good communication between the relatives/carers and staff ensured that all parties were kept up to date of any changes in people's well-being.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
There were enough staff to support people, with regular staff often providing continuity. Medicines were checked, recorded and managed according to care plans.
“People received their medicines safely and as prescribed.” from the report
Responsive management
The manager acted on complaints and suggestions, including replacing beds and mattresses that some people did not like.
“The registered manager had promptly acted and replaced some of the beds” from the report
Fire drill information
needs fixingThe manager planned to record more detail about fire drills. Night-time evacuation plans were also being reviewed because fewer staff would be present.
“The registered manager was planning to include more detailed recording in the fire drills to support them to monitor the effectiveness of evacuations in the service.” from the report
Medicine competency checks
needs fixingThe manager was improving staff medicine competency assessments so that they covered every medicine-related task staff carried out.
“The registered manager was taking action to improve the staff medicine competency assessments to ensure they included all medicine related tasks undertaken by staff.” from the report
- 01How will you manage my relative’s specific risks, such as pressure sores, dehydration or other risks identified in their care plan?
- 02How will you check that staff are competent to administer and manage all of my relative’s medicines?
- 03What arrangements are in place for evacuating people safely at night when fewer staff are present?
- 04How will you support my relative’s preferred routines, activities, communication methods and dietary needs?
- 05How will you keep me informed about my relative’s wellbeing during and after each respite stay?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five quality areas, based on observations, discussions with people and others, and checks of care and management records. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 November 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 Longhouse
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- November 2017Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 7 January 2011.
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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Gloucestershire
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 £1,030 to £1,360 a week. 31 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“She was very caring, kind and patient to all his needs, she built up a wondetful rapport with him, she was dedicated and was there for him through good times as well as through the tough times”
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.