You are here

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating


Updated 27 July 2018

This inspection took place on 28 June 2018 and 04 July 2018 and was unannounced on the first day. At our last inspection we found a breach of Regulation 15 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014; Premises and equipment as the premises were unsafe and unsuitable in some areas. At this inspection we found that improvements had been made and the service was no longer in breach of the regulation.

Kingsley House is a three storey Victorian property providing care and support for up to 16 people with mental health needs. The home is situated in the centre of New Brighton close to shops and community facilities and to the river-front. There are good public transport links to all parts of the Wirral and Liverpool. At the time of the inspection there were 15 people living in the home.

Kingsley House 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.

Kingsley House had a registered manager who has worked at the home for a number of years. 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.

We looked at how the service managed it’s recruitment of new staff and had minor concerns over how some records were maintained. The manager was open to the feedback and was making improvements whilst the inspection was taking place.

We spoke with five people who lived in the home who all gave positive feedback about the home and the staff who worked in it. They told us that the staff supported people to live their lives as independently as possible.

Staff spoken with and records seen confirmed training had been provided to enable them to support the people with their specific needs. We found staff were knowledgeable about the support needs of people in their care. We observed staff providing support to people throughout our inspection visit. We saw they had positive relationships with the people in their care.

We found medication procedures at the home were safe. Staff responsible for the administration of medicines had received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required. Medicines were kept safely with appropriate arrangements for storage in place. We did suggest that the service ensured that two staff check and sign hand written medication records.

The registered manager understood the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). This meant they were working within the law to support people who may lack capacity to make their own decisions. We saw that people were supported to make their own decisions and their choices were respected.

Care plans were person centred and driven by the people who lived who lived in the home. They detailed how people wished and needed to be cared for. They were regularly reviewed and updated as required.

The registered manager used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included regular audits of the service and staff meetings to seek the views of staff about the service. They also regularly spoke with the people who lived in the home. The provider also provided close scrutiny of the service and was a regular presence in the home providing activities for people such as swimming and the gym and providing support for the manager.

Inspection areas


Requires improvement

Updated 27 July 2018

The service was not completely safe.

Some of the record keeping in relation to staff recruitment needed to be improved upon.

Medication management had improved but staff needed to ensure that they checked and countersigned handwritten MARs.

Staffing levels were good and consistency of staff was maintained.



Updated 27 July 2018

The service was effective.

Staff had a good understanding of issues relating to consent and capacity and people were supported appropriately.

The kitchen had achieved a rating of four stars from the Food Standards agency which was good.

The staff were trained and adequately supported by the management team.



Updated 27 July 2018

The service was caring.

People�s dignity and privacy was respected at all times.

Staff had positive relationships with people and were supporting them in ways that they wished to be supported.

Staff were seen to engage positively with people to support them to be as independent as possible.



Updated 27 July 2018

The service was responsive.

Care plans were person centred and regularly reviewed and people were involved in planning their care.

Activities and outings took place regularly at the request of people living in the home.

Complaints were taken seriously and staff went �over and above� to reach a satisfactory outcome for the complainant.



Updated 27 July 2018

The service was well led.

The provider, registered manager and deputy manager had positive, collaborative relationships.

The audit systems in the home ensured that it was managed well.

The staff were supported to provide a good service for the people who lived in the home.