CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Longwood Place
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control, including safe admissions, visitor arrangements, protective equipment, testing, cleaning and managing outbreaks.
- Effective?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Caring?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This area was not assessed in this targeted inspection.
What inspectors found, January 2021
Longwood Place was inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control arrangements for its planned COVID-19 respite use.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 6 January 2021. It looked only at infection prevention and control because the home was being prepared for people discharged from hospital with a positive COVID-19 status.
No one was living at the home during the inspection. Inspectors found that staff had COVID-19 training, infection control policies were up to date, and arrangements were in place for safe admissions, visitors, testing, protective equipment, cleaning and social distancing.
The home was inspected but not rated. This means the report does not give an overall quality rating or full ratings for all five areas of care. It only records the inspectors' findings about infection prevention and control.
Infection control training
Staff had completed training about COVID-19 and how to reduce the risk of spreading infection.
“Staff had completed training about COVID-19 and how to prevent the spread of the virus.” from the report
Safe admissions and discharge
The provider was working with partner organisations to plan safe admissions and discharges.
“The provider was working closely with partnership organisations to ensure people would be admitted and discharged safely from the service.” from the report
Personalised planning
The planned assessment process would include information from families and take account of people's routines, likes and preferences.
“A full assessment of peoples needs will be carried out which will include information from the family to ensure each person receives care that is personalised and individualised.” from the report
Communication support
The home had considered support for people with hearing difficulties and other communication needs.
“The service had considered communication for people with hearing difficulties or other communication needs and had plans in plans in place to support people with communication aids.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess my relative's needs before admission, and how will you use information from our family?
- 02How will you manage admissions and discharges for people who have recently tested positive for COVID-19?
- 03How will you support my relative if they have hearing difficulties or other communication needs?
- 04What activities, internet access and support will be available during a short stay?
- 05What ratings or inspection evidence are available for caring, staffing, medicines and leadership, since this inspection did not assess those areas?
This was an announced targeted inspection of infection prevention and control only; the home was empty at the time and the service was not rated. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 January 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.
What inspectors found, May 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised respite care, with minor issues about displaying the rating and explaining complaints.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 26 April 2018. Inspectors observed care, spoke with staff and managers, contacted three relatives, and checked care plans, recruitment records, rotas, training, medicines and quality checks.
The home provides short break respite care for up to eight people with dementia, physical, sensory or learning disabilities. Two people were staying during the inspection. Inspectors found enough suitable staff, safe medicines procedures, well-managed risks, trained staff and clean premises.
Care was described as kind, respectful and tailored to each person. Families helped plan care, and staff supported people's communication, routines, interests and access to the community.
The overall rating was Good, and all five areas were rated Good. This was unchanged from the previous inspection in January 2016. Inspectors found no serious risks or concerns.
Safe staffing and medicines
The home had enough staff for the people staying there, and medicines were stored, given and checked safely.
“During our inspection we observed sufficient numbers of staff supporting people in a timely way.” from the report
Skilled staff
Staff received regular support and specialist training relevant to people's needs.
“People were cared for by staff who were supported to obtain the skills and knowledge they required to enable them to meet people's individual needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff understood people's individual needs and supported their dignity, privacy and independence.
“During our inspection we observed warm interactions between people and staff.” from the report
Personalised communication
Care plans recorded how people communicated, including through actions, pictures, communication boards and other methods.
“We saw evidence of pictorial care plans.” from the report
Family involvement
Relatives contributed information before each stay and were involved in planning and reviewing care.
“Relatives were involved in making decisions about the care and support they wished their family member to receive during their stay at the service.” from the report
Rating was not displayed
minorThe provider had not displayed the previous CQC rating on its website. The manager acted immediately after inspectors raised this.
“During our inspection we noted the provider had failed to display the rating from our previous inspection.” from the report
Complaints information was not familiar to relatives
minorAlthough relatives said they would raise concerns with managers, they did not know about the provider's complaints policy.
“All the relatives we spoke with were unaware of the provider's complaints policy however all were confident that if they had any concerns the deputy and registered managers would listen and action any concerns.” from the report
- 01How will you assess and update my relative's care plan and risk assessments before each respite stay?
- 02Which communication methods can you use for my relative, and which staff are trained to use them?
- 03How will you check and record my relative's medicines, including any changes since the last stay?
- 04How will you explain the complaints policy to our family and tell us how concerns are followed up?
- 05What changes, if any, were made after analysing the 26 questionnaire responses?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, with observations used because the people staying at the home were unable to speak with inspectors. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 May 2018 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 Place
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 31 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.