You are here

Kingsleigh Residential Requires improvement

Reports


Inspection carried out on 12 June 2019

During a routine inspection

About the service: Kingsleigh Residential is a care home. People in residential care homes receive accommodation and 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.

Kingsleigh Residential accommodates up to 23 older people. At the time of the inspection, 13 people were living there.

People’s experience of using this service:

People were at risk of cross contamination due to staff not being able to access effective hand washing facilities. Hot water temperatures were not being undertaken to ensure they were within safe parameters and on occasions they were recorded as being above recommended guidelines.

Staff were not receiving supervision, training and an annual appraisal in line with the providers policies. People were not always supported by staff who demonstrated compassion and a positive approach to people. The provider failed to ensure quality assurance systems were in place to identify shortfalls.

Some areas of the home required improving such as ceilings and a broken extractor fan. Staff received training in safe administration of medicines however staff were not always recording the administration of topical medicines such as creams. Staff were not always able to demonstrate a good understanding of the types of abuse or the Equality Act 2010. Care plans were not always current and up to date reflecting people’s current care needs or end of life wishes. Not all people knew how to make a complaint should they need to.

People and staff felt the service was safe and that the food was nice. People were supported to access medical appointments and health professionals when required. People had choice and control and had their views sought. Care plans contained important information such as likes and dislikes and people’s personal information. Activities such as exercises, dancing, themed days, and listening to music were provided to people.

People were supported by staff who had checks undertaken to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable adults. Incidents and accidents were recorded, and an overview held so that any trends and themes could be identified.

Rating at last inspection: Good (published December 2016).

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on previous rating. At this inspection we found a deterioration had been made and the overall rating had changed from Good to Requires Improvement.

Follow up: We found three breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014. We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive. We will visit the service in line with our inspection schedule, or sooner if required.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Inspection carried out on 16 September 2016

During a routine inspection

This inspection was unannounced and took place on 16 September 2016.

Kingsley Residential Home is registered to provide accommodation for older people who require personal care for a maximum of 23 people. The home is set in well laid out gardens and has easy access to Burnham-on-Sea town centre. Some people living in the home were living with a dementia, so were unable to tell us of their experiences.

There is a registered manager in post. 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 service was not always safe because staff propped the fire doors into the dining room open. Records of fire drills did not show which staff had taken part. However, staff received quarterly fire training and information was available to guide staff during emergencies. Staff did not have all the information they needed to meet people’s dietary needs.

Some areas of the home needed maintenance work. Some people’s emergency call bells were out of reach and there were no call bells accessible in some areas of the home.

People had mixed experience during lunch because one person waited 15 minutes and another person was given their medicines during lunch. However, relatives told us there were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs. People and relatives told us staff were very kind, considerate and friendly.

Staff did not ensure one person was adequately covered to protect their privacy and dignity when they were hoisted.

People or their representatives were involved in planning their care. Care plans accurately reflected the care people needed.

People’s needs were reviewed regularly, and changes made where necessary.

People were given choices, and staff always sought consent before giving people care and support. Staff encouraged people to be as independent as they could be.

Staff received Gold Standard Framework training, which meant people’s end of life wishes were respected.

People and relatives were given opportunities to feedback their views about the home and the service. Everyone was very happy with the service they received.

Staff told us they were supported. Staff completed regular training to give them the skills they needed to be able to meet people’s needs.

Inspection carried out on 20 September 2013

During a routine inspection

There were 17 people living at the home at the time of the inspection.

Nine people told us they were happy with their care and felt included in their care plans. One person said "The staff are very nice and do everything they can to make you happy here".

We observed that the nine care plans we saw were centred around each person's individual care needs. We noted that each person's care plan contained detailed risk assessments in relation to their daily living needs.

People told us they enjoyed the meals and snacks provided by the home. We observed that three people required close observation of their nutritional status. We noted that nutritional risk assessments had been undertaken for each person and food charts were documented appropriately.

Staff told us about the policies relating to infection control and cleanliness at the home. We observed that home was clean and well maintained and people were able to access the grounds independently.

We observed throughout the visit that staff interacted well with people living at the home. We noted that people were well known to staff which enabled people to fulfil their potential and live full and happy lives at the home.

We noted there were robust quality monitoring systems in place. We saw evidence of where changes had been implemented following the outcomes of the audit programme at the home.

Inspection carried out on 10 January 2013

During a routine inspection

There were 17 people living in the home at the time of the inspection. During our visit we spoke with six people who told us that they were very happy living in the home and were unanimous in agreeing that they were treated with respect and "always felt safe".

We observed a person centered approach to the planning and delivery of care and support and a family member told us "how happy their relative was in the home"

People told us that they had good relationships with staff and were able to talk to them if they had any concerns. We spoke to two staff who told us "we really enjoy caring for the people in the home and we are supported and valued by the registered manager".

People made positive comments about the staff and one person told us "nothing is ever too much trouble and they really make you feel at home". People really enjoyed the wide range of activities that were available and told us "you can do what activities you want or have a quiet time in your room; it's always up to you".

People told us they felt involved in the decision making in the home and we observed in the Residents Meeting notes how people's requests about changes to the mealtimes were being put in place.

Reports under our old system of regulation (including those from before CQC was created)