We carried out an announced comprehensive inspection on 3 March 2019.

Langdale and Keswick (Parkfields) provides care and accommodation for up to 8 people in two separate bungalows. On the day of our inspection there were 8 people living at the service. The home provides residential care for people with a learning disability.

People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

At the last inspection on the 14 December 2016, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of Good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated good:

People were not all able to fully verbalise their views and staff used other methods of communication, for example sign language.

People remained safe at the service. People were protected from abuse as staff understood what action they needed to take if they suspected anyone was being abused, mistreated or neglected. Staff were recruited safely and checks carried out with the disclosure and barring service (DBS) ensured they were suitable to work with vulnerable adults. There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs and help to keep them safe.

People’s had their risks assessed, monitored and managed by staff to help ensure they remained safe. Staff assessed and understood risks associated with people’s care and lifestyle. Risks were managed effectively to keep people safe whilst maintaining people’s rights and independence.

People had their medicines managed safely, and received their medicines in a way they chose and preferred. Staff undertook regular training and competency checks to test their knowledge and to help ensure their skills in relation to medicines were up to date and in line with best practice.

People were supported by a staff team who had completed training to meet their needs effectively. Staff meetings, one to one supervision of staff practice, and appraisals of performance were undertaken. Staff completed the Care Certificate (a nationally recognised training course for staff new to care).

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People's health was monitored by the staff and they had access to a variety of healthcare professionals. The registered manager worked closely with external health and social care professionals to help ensure a coordinate approach to people’s care.

People’s care and support was based on legislation and best practice guidelines; helping to ensure the best outcomes for people. People’s legal rights were up held and consent to care was sought as much as possible. Care records were person centred and held full details on how people liked their needs to be met; taking into account people’s preferences and wishes.

Overall, people’s individual equality and diversity preferences were known and respected. Information recorded included people’s previous medical and social history and people’s cultural, religious and spiritual needs.

People were treated with kindness and compassion by t

Our inspection took place on 25 and 31 August 2016 and was unannounced. We last inspected the service on 19 December 2013 when we found the provider was meeting regulations.

Langdale and Keswick is a care home that provides personal care to people who have a learning disability. The home can accommodate eight people, with seven people living there at the time of our inspection.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People’s safety was promoted through the provider identifying risks to people and then putting measures in place to ensure people were safe, while promoting their independence. People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff that knew them well. Staff understood how to identify potential abuse and protect people from harm. People received their medicines in a safe way. Staff were checked for their suitability to work with people before starting work at the home.

People were supported by staff who were skilled and knowledgeable. Staff were supported with on-going training and demonstrated they were able to put this into practice. People were asked for their consent before they received care and support, and we saw people’s rights were promoted. People could have the food and drink they wanted, this reflecting their preferences and needs. People were supported to have regular access to community healthcare.

We saw staff were kind, caring, and respectful to people. People’s individuality was recognised and respected. People’s dignity and privacy was respected. People made choices about how their care was delivered.

People were involved in planning their care, with support where needed. People’s views were sought when their needs and preferences changed. Staff understood how to deliver care that reflected the person’s individual needs and preferences. People were supported to live their life how they wished with support to access the wider community. People knew how to complain and had confidence complaints would be resolved.

The service was well led and people expressed confidence in staff and the provider. The provider has a clear ethos that was person centred, understood by staff and reflected how home was run. There were systems in place to capture people’s experiences and make changes based on what people wanted. Staff felt well supported, liked working for the provider and were happy in their work.

We spoke with five staff including the manager, deputy manager and senior carer. We met five people who lived in the two bungalows. Some people were unable to express their views verbally, so we spent time observing how staff supported them.

We saw people had been supported to consent to their care, and that arrangements for care had been explained to people in a way they understood.

People's needs had been assessed and care plans were detailed. These plans provided specific guidance to meet people’s needs and reduce any risks to them.

People participated in a range of daily activities centred on their interests this supporting them in a lifestyle of their choosing. One person told us, “I like to go out for pub lunches and the staff take me”.

People lived in a safe, clean and comfortable environment that had been suitably adapted to meet their needs. One person told us, “I love my bedroom”.

People benefitted from staffing levels that met their specific needs and enabled them to engage in activities with the support they needed to be safe. One staff member told us, “It’s a lovely place to work. We have support from our manager, regular training and enough staff to support people”.

We saw people had access to a complaints procedure and systems were in place to seek their views and comments about their experiences. One such comment was, ‘We couldn’t ask for a better place’.

We met five people who lived at the home. We spoke with two people and four staff. People told us that they were able to say what they wanted and staff listened to them. They told us they were involved in planning their lives and the support they received. People told us they were treated with dignity and respect. One person said, “Staff are very very good with me”.

We looked at three people’s care records and found these set out their support needs clearly and were updated regularly. What staff told us reflected what we saw recorded in people’s records. This meant that people’s care plans were up to date and staff understood what people’s needs were.

People had regular contact with health professionals, this recorded and confirmed by people we spoke with. We saw people had health plans that clearly set out how their health was to be promoted.

People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

We saw a comment from a relative in a survey form this saying, “Staff are very supportive, well trained”. Staff told us they were well supported by the manager and they received regular and sufficient training that allowed them to do their jobs well.

People who used the service, their representatives were asked for their views by the provider. One person told us that it was a, “Very happy home”.