We carried out a review of the data available to us about Kadimah on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Kadimah, you can give feedback on this service.
This unannounced inspection took place on 28 November 2018. At this inspection we found the service remained Good overall.
Why the service is rated Good overall:
There is a registered manager running the service who is also the registered manager for a separate adjacent service. 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.
The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.
People’s safety was upheld by staff who had been trained in safeguarding vulnerable adults and health and safety policies and procedures. Staff demonstrated understanding of how to protect people and who to alert if they had any concerns. General environmental/operational risks and risks to individuals were identified and appropriate action was taken to eradicate or reduce them.
There were enough staff on duty at all times to meet people’s diverse, individual needs safely and effectively. The service benefited from a core of stable and experienced staff. The provider had robust recruitment procedures. People were given their medicines safely, at the right times and in the right amounts by trained and competent staff.
Staff were well-trained and able to meet people’s health and well-being needs. They were able to respond very effectively to people’s current and changing needs. The service sought advice from and worked with health and other professionals to ensure they met people’s needs. We have made a recommendation in respect of the food safety practices conducted within the service.
People were encouraged 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 practise.
The committed and knowledgeable staff team provided care with kindness and respect. Individualised and person-centred care planning ensured people’s equality and diversity was respected. People were provided with a range of activities, according to their needs, abilities, health and preferences. Care plans were reviewed on occasions by management staff. Care plans mostly contained up to date information and records demonstrated that risk assessments were reviewed within most stated timescales.
The registered manager was well regarded by staff and family members. He was described as supportive, approachable and focussed on the needs of the people living in the service. The good quality of care the service provided continued to be reviewed and improved, as necessary.
This was an unannounced inspection which took place on 19 April 2016.
Kadimah is a residential care home situated in Ravenswood Village. The village is a community for adults with learning disabilities run by the charitable organisation, Norwood. People have access to the facilities and services provided in the village. These include a café, swimming pool and horse riding.
The home provides a service for people with learning and other disabilities. The service is registered to provide care for up to eleven people and there were nine people living there on the day of the visit. People were provided with ground or first floor accommodation, according to their physical abilities. There was an annexe where people were supported to live more independently.
There is a registered manager running the service. 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.
Everyone who lived in, worked in or visited the service were kept as safe from harm as possible. Staff were properly trained so they knew how to keep people safe from any form of abuse. The service had robust health and safety policies and procedures which staff understood and followed to keep people as safe as possible. Any risks were identified and action was taken to reduce them, as far as possible. There were high staff ratios to ensure people were looked after safely. The recruitment procedure made sure, that as far as possible, staff were safe and suitable to work with the people who live in the home. Medicines were given safely by properly trained staff.
People were helped to maintain their health and well-being. Staff responded quickly to people’s needs. They sought advice from and worked closely with health and other professionals to meet people’s needs in the best way. People’s physical and emotional needs were met to ensure people were able to enjoy their lives as much as they could.
People’s rights were understood and promoted by the staff and registered manager of the service. The service understood the relevance of the Mental Capacity Act 2005, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards and consent issues which related to the people in their care. The Mental Capacity Act 2005 legislation provides a legal framework that sets out how to act to support people who may not have capacity to do so. People were helped to make decisions and choices so they could control their daily lives as much as possible.
A stable, caring staff team provided care to people they knew well and whose needs they fully understood. Staff were well trained, understanding and responsive to changes in people’s needs and wishes. People were treated with respect and dignity at all times. Staff understood what person centred (individualised) care meant and why it was important. They were non-discriminatory and met people’s equality and diversity needs. People were provided with a variety of activities, according to their needs, abilities and preferences.
The service was well-led by a highly thought of registered manager and supportive management team. The service had an open and positive management style which encouraged people, staff and others to express their views and opinions. The quality of the care provided was regularly monitored by the registered and other managers. Improvements had been made as a result of the quality assurance processes and listening to people, staff and others.
Staff appeared motivated with one member of staff saying that they "loved" their job and another said their work was "rewarding". Staff spoke with pride about their work and the progress that some people had made.
We saw that the home was clean but in need of decoration. The environment and decor did not support the sense of hope and enthusiasm that the people receiving care and those caring for them expressed about living and working in the home.
Staff told us that they felt well supported and involved in the running of the home. They felt safe at work.
People were encouraged to make choices and staff supported people in this. We saw that people were treated as individuals and there were opportunities for people to spend time pursuing leisure; educational or work based activities both within the 'Village' and in the local community.
We saw staff interacting with people in a friendly and calm way and observed personal care being given in a respectful way.
The home was suitably designed and people living at the home had personalised their own rooms. People were able to lock their doors if they wished.
There was a system in place for recruiting staff which sought the views of the people who live at the home. However the provider did not take steps to obtain information about any physical or mental health conditions relevant to people's ability to work at the home.
We looked at the system in place for dealing with complaints. We found people were aware of the complaints procedure. When complaints were made they were dealt with in accordance with the home's complaints procedure.
People told us about their preferred activities rather than answering direct questions.
Two people used assistive technologies to support their communication.
We observed the interactions between the staff and people who live at the home. The home appeared to have a relaxed and friendly atmosphere. We saw staff supporting people in a way that was both respectful and friendly.