CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Longmoor Lodge Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found robust safeguarding processes, enough suitably trained staff, effective risk assessments, safe medicines management and appropriate infection control. Accidents and incidents were investigated and used to reduce future risks.
- Effective?
- Good
- This key question was not reviewed during this focused inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This key question was not reviewed during this focused inspection, although inspectors observed positive relationships and respectful interactions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This key question was not reviewed during this focused inspection. Inspectors noted feedback that relatives needed better day-to-day information.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found comprehensive quality checks, clear action plans and effective oversight by the home and provider. The previous breach relating to quality monitoring had been addressed.
What inspectors found, January 2023
Longmoor Lodge Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, well-managed care, with communication to relatives still needing attention.
This was an unannounced focused inspection on 5 December 2022. Inspectors looked only at Safe and Well-led, after safeguarding concerns were raised by the provider. They spoke with people, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional, and reviewed care, medicine and management records.
Inspectors found people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. There were enough trained staff, risks were assessed, medicines were given safely, and the home was clean and maintained. Safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents were investigated, with lessons used to improve safety.
The home had effective checks and action plans to monitor quality. The overall rating improved from Requires Improvement to Good since the previous inspection in March 2021. The provider had addressed the earlier breach of Regulation 17 and was no longer in breach.
Safeguarding
The home had clear safeguarding systems. Staff knew how to recognise and report suspected abuse, and investigations were carried out with the local authority and internally.
“People were protected from the risk of abuse.” from the report
Staffing and risk management
Staffing levels were based on people's needs. Staff understood risk guidance and were observed supporting people safely, including with moving and handling.
“There was sufficient staff with the necessary training, skills and competence to promote people's safety and wellbeing.” from the report
Medicines
Medicines were stored, recorded and given safely. The home used audits and action plans when issues were found.
“People received their medicine safely and as prescribed.” from the report
Quality oversight
The home had regular checks, action plans and provider visits. Inspectors found these systems helped identify and complete improvements.
“There was a comprehensive governance programme in place.” from the report
Relationships and atmosphere
Inspectors saw a warm atmosphere and positive relationships between people and staff. People were treated with dignity and respect.
“There was a warm and welcoming atmosphere within the service.” from the report
Updates for relatives
minorFeedback suggested that relatives were not always kept informed about people's day-to-day wellbeing. The home had introduced a resident of the day system to improve communication.
“We received feedback that communication could be improved with relatives, so they are informed of people's day to day wellbeing.” from the report
- 01How is the resident of the day system being used to keep relatives informed about day-to-day wellbeing?
- 02How will you tell families about safeguarding concerns, investigations and any changes made to keep people safe?
- 03How do you check that staffing levels remain suitable when people's needs change or agency staff are used?
- 04How are medicine audits followed up, particularly when a person misses medicines or needs a change to administration times?
- 05What improvements have been made since the previous inspection, and how are you checking that they remain effective?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; Caring, Effective and Responsive were not reviewed during this visit. This explanation was written from the published report of 5 January 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, June 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found infection-control improvements, while the home's overall rating remained Requires Improvement.
This was an unannounced targeted inspection on 17 May 2021. One inspector checked whether the home had met a Warning Notice about infection control under Regulation 12. The inspection did not assess the whole service.
Inspectors found that improvements had been made. Areas included replacing carpets, redecorating, sealing bathroom flooring, reorganising the sluice and improving the use and storage of cleaning products. Cleaning records were completed and checked by the manager.
The home was assured to be managing infection risks, including visitors, personal protective equipment, testing, social distancing and visits. The overall rating was not changed by this targeted inspection and remained Requires Improvement. The previous rating was published on 9 March 2021.
Infection-control improvements
Inspectors found that the home had made the improvements required to protect people from infection risks.
“The provider had made the necessary improvements to ensure people were protected from risks associated with infection prevention and control.” from the report
Cleaning arrangements
Cleaning products were stored more safely, staff had training about their use, and cleaning records were completed and overseen.
“Cleaning records were completed and the manager had oversight to ensure this was effective.” from the report
Visits and infection precautions
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, protective equipment, testing, social distancing and visits in line with current guidance.
“We were assured the provider was facilitating visits for people living in the home in accordance with the current guidance.” from the report
Overall rating remained Requires Improvement
needs fixingThe targeted inspection did not reassess the whole service, so the previous overall rating remained Requires Improvement.
“The overall rating for the service has not changed following this targeted inspection and remains Requires Improvement.” from the report
No registered manager
minorThere was an interim manager while the provider recruited a registered manager.
“The service did not have a registered manager, however there was an interim manager working in the home whilst the provider recruited a new registered manager.” from the report
- 01What improvements are still needed for the home's overall Requires Improvement rating?
- 02What is the timetable for recruiting a registered manager?
- 03How are cleaning records and cleaning-product dilution checks reviewed now?
- 04How are infection-control arrangements for visitors, testing, protective equipment and visits kept up to date?
- 05When is the next comprehensive inspection expected?
This was a targeted inspection of the infection-control part of Safe and did not assess the whole service; the previous ratings carried over. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 June 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 Longmoor Lodge Care Home
6 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- January 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2021Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- March 2021Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2020Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2015Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- March 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 10 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
62 live-in carers within about an hour of Derbyshire
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 £1,010 to £1,260 a week. 51 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Ernest is an amazing professional carer who delivers care from the heart.”
“We particularly appreciate the companionship Dawn gives in the evenings when she plays cards and Scrabble with my mother.”
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.