Archived: Kingswood Court Care Home

Updated 12 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.

The inspection took place on 21 November 2017 and was unannounced. This was a comprehensive inspection carried out by two inspectors, a specialist nursing advisor and an 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 reviewed the information we had about the service. This included any notifications of significant events, such as serious injuries or safeguarding referrals. Notifications are information about important events which the provider is required to send us by law.

We used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During the inspection we spoke with two people who lived at the service and three relatives. We spoke with the Director of Operations, the manager, two registered general nurses (RGN), six staff and the chef. We looked at the care records of six people, including their assessments, care plans and risk assessments. We looked at how medicines were managed and the records relating to this. We looked at five records relating to staff recruitment, support and training. We also looked at records used to monitor the quality of the service, such as the provider’s own audits of different aspects of the service.

Updated 12 January 2018

The inspection took place on 21 November 2017 and was unannounced.

Kingswood Court Care Home is a ‘care home’. 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. At the time of our inspection there were 40 people at the home.

At our last inspection we found two breaches that related to medicines and consent. At this inspection we found actions had been taken to ensure the regulations had been met and the service had improved.

There was not a registered manager in post. The provider had recruited a manager who was in the process of registering with the Care Quality Commission to carry on regulated activities at the home. 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 and their relatives told us they felt the service was safe and they were complimentary about the staff and how caring they were. They stated that staff were very kind and they had no concerns about their safety. Staff had received training in relation to safeguarding and they were able to describe the types of abuse and the processes to be followed when reporting suspected or actual abuse.

Staff had received training, regular supervisions and annual appraisals that helped them to perform their duties. New staff commencing their duties received induction training to help prepare them for their role. Staff told us that they worked with another member of staff until they and their registered manager felt they were competent to work on their own.

There were enough staff to ensure that people’s assessed needs could be met. It was clear that staff had a good understanding of how to attend to people’s needs. The provider had carried out full recruitment checks to ensure staff were safe to work at the home. Risks to individual people had been identified and written guidance for staff about how to manage risks was being followed.

Accidents and incidents were recorded and monitored by staff at the home to help minimise the risk of repeated events.

Medicines were managed in a safe way and the recording of medicines was completed to show people had received the medicines they required. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s medicines and explained to people what their medicines were for.

The environment was very clean and tidy there were no malodours at the home. Staff followed good practice guidance in relation to infection control to minimise the risk of cross infections.

Where there were restrictions in place, staff had followed the legal requirements to make sure this was done in the person’s best interests. Staff understood the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) to ensure decisions were made for people in the least restrictive way.

Staff supported people to eat a good range of foods. Those with a specific dietary requirement were provided with appropriate food. People had access to external health services and professional involvement was sought by staff when appropriate to help maintain good health.

Staff showed kindness and compassion and people’s privacy and dignity were upheld. People were able to spend time on their own in their bedrooms and their personal care needs were attended to in private. People took part in a variety of activities that interested them. People’s relatives and visitors were welcomed and there were no restrictions of times of visits.

Documentation that enabled staff to support people and to record the care they had received was up to date and regularly reviewed. People’s preferences, likes and dislikes were recorded.

A complaints procedure was available for any concerns. This was displayed at the service. No complaints had been received, but the registered manager and staff had received many letters complimenting them on the care they provide to people.

Staff and the provider undertook quality assurance audits to ensure the care provided was of a standard people should expect. Any areas identified as needing improvement were attended to by staff. People, relatives and associated professionals had been asked for their views about the care provided and how the home was run. Regular resident and relatives and staff meetings took place.

Interruption to people’s care would be minimised in the event of an emergency. The provider had Business Continuity Plan that detailed how staff would manage the service in the event of adverse incidents.