CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Longwood Grange
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, December 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe care and stronger management, but staff deployment was sometimes disorganised.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 5 December 2023. Inspectors spoke with people using the home, relatives, staff and a health professional. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff overall, safe medicines practices, suitable risk assessments, safeguarding arrangements and good quality checks. However, staff were not always deployed in an organised way, so people sometimes had to wait for help.
The environment was clean but showed wear in places, including chipped paint and scratched handrails. The home had a refurbishment plan. The previous rating was Requires Improvement in 2019, with breaches of regulations. Inspectors found enough improvement had been made and there were no current breaches.
Risk management
People had detailed care plans and risk assessments. Staff worked with health professionals to manage people’s needs and risks.
“People had detailed care plans and risk assessments in place. These were regularly reviewed and reflective of individual needs and risks.” from the report
Management oversight
The manager had good oversight of the home. Quality checks were used to identify shortfalls and make improvements.
“Quality assurance systems and processes were in place to monitor the service and drive improvement.” from the report
Positive culture
People, relatives and staff described an open and positive culture. People and relatives were involved in care and feedback was used to make changes.
“There was an open and positive culture at the service which was inclusive and achieved good outcomes for people.” from the report
Staff deployment
needs fixingThere were enough staff overall, but they were not always organised effectively. One person had to wait because two staff were needed and only one was available.
“However, at times deployment of staff appeared disorganised and occasionally people had to wait.” from the report
Wear to the environment
minorThe home was clean, but some areas needed refurbishment. The provider had a plan to address this.
“The service was clean, however the environment was showing signs of wear, for example, chipped paint and scratched handrails.” from the report
- 01How are staff deployed during mealtimes and when people are being helped to bed?
- 02What changes have been made after the recommendation about staff deployment?
- 03Which parts of the home have been refurbished, and what work remains under the refurbishment plan?
- 04What are the current ratings and findings for Effective, Caring and Responsive, which were not inspected during this visit?
- 05How are people and relatives involved in care reviews and decisions about improvements?
This was a focused inspection of Safe and Well-led only; the other key question ratings carried over from the previous inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 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, March 2022
Longwood Grange was inspected but not rated; infection controls were mostly assured, but some premises and PPE issues needed attention.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 17 February 2022. Inspectors checked infection prevention and control, and asked about staffing pressures linked to COVID-19.
Inspectors were assured about visitor checks, testing, social distancing, admissions and managing infection outbreaks. Visits were being supported in line with national and local guidance.
Some areas were harder to keep clean because parts of the building needed refurbishment. Inspectors also found an occasion when PPE was not removed for a break, and some PPE and hygiene dispensers were not ready for use.
The service was inspected but not rated. This means the visit did not give a Good, Requires improvement or Inadequate rating.
Visitor infection checks
The home checked visitors' COVID-19 testing and vaccination status and required hand sanitising and PPE.
“There were secure procedures to ensure all visitors to the service helped to prevent the spread of infection” from the report
Housekeeping responsibility
A newly appointed housekeeping manager was responsible for maintaining infection control procedures and standards.
“There was a newly appointed designated housekeeping manager who was responsible for ensuring infection prevention and control (IPC) procedures and standards were maintained.” from the report
Outbreak arrangements
Inspectors were assured that the home had arrangements to prevent and manage infection outbreaks.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Areas needing refurbishment
needs fixingWorn paint and other fixtures made some areas more difficult to keep clean. The registered manager said there was a refurbishment plan.
“Some parts of the premises, fixtures and fittings were in need of refurbishment which made areas difficult to keep clean.” from the report
PPE practice
needs fixingInspectors saw a staff member take a break outside without removing PPE. Management said it would increase observations of staff practice.
“On one occasion we saw a member of staff take a break outside without removing their PPE.” from the report
Supplies and disposal bins
needs fixingA paper towel dispenser and a hand sanitiser dispenser were empty, and suitable bins for disposing of PPE were not always available.
“There were not always appropriate bins in place for the disposal of PPE.” from the report
- 01What work has been completed under the refurbishment plan, and which areas still need attention?
- 02How often are hand sanitiser and paper towel dispensers checked, and how quickly are empty dispensers refilled?
- 03What changes have been made to ensure PPE is removed safely and disposed of in suitable bins?
- 04How are managers observing staff practice and checking that infection control procedures are followed?
- 05Were COVID-19-related staffing pressures affecting care or daily life for people living in the home?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, with questions about COVID-19-related staffing pressures; it did not assess the other four questions or provide an overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 March 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 Longwood Grange
6 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2023Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- March 2022Inspected but not ratedSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2019Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- November 2018Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- April 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 30 January 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Kirklees
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. 86 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
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.