London Care (Lingfield Lodge)

The service supported people who were living with a range of complex needs including mental health, learning diability, physical disability and dementia. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also consider any wider social care provided. There were 47 people being supported by London Care at the time of the inspection.

Right Support: People's mental and physical health needs, and associated risks, were not always assessed appropriately so that staff could provide safe and responsive support. The service did not have enough appropriately skilled staff to meet some people's needs and support them effectively. Feedback from people and professionals was that the skills and training of staff on supporting people with complex needs could be improved. Some people received support with their medicines although these were not always managed safely and effectively. There were sufficient staff to support people although feedback from people on the timings and lengths of calls were mixed.

Right Care: People did not always receive personalised care. Some care plans lacked detail about people's physical and mental conditions and what staff should do to support these responsively. Staff understood how to apply the principles of safeguarding people, and how to recognise and report abuse. There was a lack of personalised approach to identifying individual risks associated with people's mental and physical health conditions. The provider's quality assurance systems had not identified these shortfalls. Some people received support with their medicines although these were not always managed safely and effectively. Right Culture:

People told us that management support and approach was inconsistent and that interim management arrangements had not been as effective or consistent in their oversight of staff or their support. Quality assurance systems were not fully effective as they had not identified shortfalls identified in the full report. People's communication needs had been assessed and information could be provided to people in an accessible format. Complaints were dealt with in line with the provider's policy.