• Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Jeesal Kelling Park

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Holgate Hill, Kelling, Holt, Norfolk, NR25 7ER (01603) 876000

Provided and run by:
Jeesal Akman Care Corporation Limited

All Inspections

13 June 2016

During a routine inspection

We conducted an unannounced inspection of Jeesal Kelling Park on 13 June 2016.

At our last inspection on September 2014, the service met all regulations inspected.

Jeesal Kelling Park provides 24-hour care, support and accommodation for a maximum of 14 adults with learning disabilities, physical disabilities, mental health needs or autistic spectrum disorder. There were nine people using the service when we visited.

The service had a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (CQC) 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 consented to their support and were involved in the planning and review of their care. The registered manager ensured that people were able to contribute to the running of the service and sought for people to be involved. People living at the home were involved in the training of staff.

Staff were aware of the requirements of their role and safe recruitment processes were in place. Staff supported people safely and knew what to do to protect people from the risk of abuse.

Recruitment procedures ensured staff had the appropriate values when they were employed and gained skills and qualifications shortly after they started work. Ongoing training was provided and staff were encouraged to pass on their expertise to their colleagues through role modelling and team meetings.

People received their medicines in a safe manner and staff recorded and completed Medicine Administration Record (MAR) charts correctly.

People had access to healthcare services and received on-going healthcare support for example through their GP, hospital doctors and specialists. Referrals were made to other professionals such as psychologists and dieticians if the need arose.

Risk assessments and care plans for people using the service were effective, individual, person centred and they included the required information. People’s individual care needs were recorded daily in detail and this information was shared with staff so that the care delivered was responsive. There was a strong focus on supporting people in becoming more independent by working together with them.

Quality assurance systems were in place to assess and monitor the service people received. Families were consulted so that their views could be gained. These views were acted upon with actions taken and improvements made. Complaints were appropriately responded to, in line with the providers policy.

26 September 2014

During an inspection in response to concerns

A single inspector carried out this inspection. They spoke with three of the nine people who were living at the home, four relatives and six staff members.

We carried out this inspection to look into the concerns we had been told about regarding a lack of information about the management of people's behaviour in support plans, restraint being used and insufficient staffing levels being provided at the home. The focus of the inspection was to answer the five key questions; is the service safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led?

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes what people using the service, relatives and staff told us, what we observed and the records we looked at.

If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary please read the full report.

This is a summary of what we found:

Is the service safe?

People were treated with respect and dignity by staff. They told us that they liked living at Jeesal Kelling Park. People were consulted and involved in planning their care. The care and support needs of people had been assessed and reviewed to ensure they were provided with the care and support they needed.

Staff were trained and knew how to provide care and support to people. This meant that the staff members employed had the qualifications and skills needed to support people living at the service.

There was a process in place in relation to the Mental Capacity Act (2005) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguarding (DoLS) to ensure that people who could not make decisions for themselves were protected. Policies and procedures were held. Staff had been trained and knew when a DoLS application was needed. The manager told us that there had been no reason for a DoLS application to be made. The manager showed us that they knew how to submit a DoLS application.

Is the service effective?

People's health and care needs were assessed with them or their family member. Specialist dietary, mobility and equipment needs had been identified in care plans when required. Relatives told us their family member received the care and attention they required in a way that met their needs. Through our observations and speaking with staff we noted that the staff understood the care and support needs of each person. One person living at the service told us. 'It is nice here and the staff are good.' Staff had received suitable training to meet the needs of people living at the home.

Is the service caring?

People were supported by staff who used a kind and attentive approach. We saw that the staff were patient and encouraged people to be as independent as possible. People told us that the staff provided them with the care and assistance they required. Our observations confirmed this. A relative told us, 'I am happy with the care given to my family member. The members of staff are polite and respectful.'

Is the service responsive?

Care and risk assessments had been written and reviewed. The care and support provided was adjusted to meet the needs of each person. Changes in a person's care and support had also been recorded in their plans of care. A record was held of people's preferences, interests and diverse needs so that these could be respected by staff. Relatives told us that staff members consulted their family member and encouraged them to make their own decisions. People received the individual support they needed and had access to a range of planned activities. Sufficient staff were provided to ensure people received the individual support they required.

Is the service well led?

Staff spoken with had an understanding of the ethos of the home. People said that they felt listened to when they made a suggestion or raised their concerns. They told us that the manager and staff were approachable and that the service was well organised. The records we looked at and our observations confirmed this.