Archived: Kingsley Road

Updated 20 January 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection checked whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 11 December 2017 and was unannounced. The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector and one Expert by Experience. An expert-by-experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection, we looked at information we held about the provider and home. This included their Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account during the inspection.

We spoke with three people and one relative. We spoke with the registered manager, assistant manager, area manager and four staff members. We looked at two people’s care records and associated documents and observed interactions between staff and people in communal areas. We looked at three staff files including the registered managers, previous inspection reports, rotas, audits, staff training and supervision records, health and safety paperwork, accident and incident records, statement of purpose, complaints and compliments, minutes from staff meetings and a selection of the provider’s policies.

Updated 20 January 2018

Kingsley Road is a service providing care for people with learning disabilities and/or physical disabilities. It is registered to accommodate up to eight people who require personal care, in three purpose built bungalows. At the time of the inspection, seven people were living there. The service is located in a residential area on the edge of Chippenham.

At the last inspection, the service was rated Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Why the service is rated Good.

The home continued to ensure people were safe. There were enough suitable staff to meet people’s needs. Risk assessments were carried out to enable people to retain their independence and receive care with minimum risk to themselves or others. People received their medicines safely and people were protected from abuse because staff understood how to keep them safe; staff understood the processes they should follow if an allegation of abuse was made. All staff informed us concerns would be followed up if they were raised. The homes were clean and well maintained throughout.

People continued to receive effective care. People who lacked capacity had decisions made in line with current legislation. Staff received training to ensure they had the skills and knowledge required to effectively support people. People told us, and we saw, their healthcare needs were met. People were supported to eat and drink according to their likes and dislikes. 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.

The home continued to provide a caring service to people. People and their relatives told us, and we observed that staff were kind and patient. People’s privacy and dignity was respected by staff and their cultural or religious needs were valued. People were involved in decisions about the care and support they received. People’s choices were always respected and staff encouraged choice for those who struggled to communicate with them.

The home remained responsive to people’s individual needs. Care and support was personalised to each person which ensured they were able to make choices about their day to day lives. People had chosen the colours to decorate their homes and had been supported to personalise their bedrooms. People were supported to follow their own activity programmes. These considered people’s hobbies and interests and reflected people’s preferences. People knew how to complain and there were a range of opportunities for them to raise concerns with the registered manager and designated staff.

The home continued to be well led. People and staff spoke highly about the management. The registered manager continually monitored the quality of the service and made improvements in accordance with people’s changing needs.

The service met all relevant fundamental standards.