You are here

Reports


Inspection carried out on 12 December 2017

During a routine inspection

This unannounced comprehensive inspection took place on the 12 December 2017. The last comprehensive inspection took place on the 29 September 2015. The service was meeting the requirements of the regulations at that time. At this inspection we found the service remained good.

People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. King Charles Court is a care home with nursing which offers care and support for up to 30 predominately older people. It is situated in the town of Falmouth. There are two floors accessed by a passenger lift. Where floors are split there is a stair lift. Each person has their own room which has en-suite facilities. There are two bathrooms with additional toilets located in both services. There is a lounge and dining area on the ground floor. At the time of the inspection there were 27 people living at the service. Some of these people were living with dementia.

There was a registered manager in place. 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 observed staff providing support to people throughout our inspection visit. We saw they were kind, patient and treated people with dignity and respect.

People who lived at the service and their visitors told us they were happy living at the service and felt safe in the care of staff supporting them. One person said, “Nothing is too much trouble for them [staff].”

People visiting the service told us staff were attentive, kind and caring towards their relatives. They said their relatives were getting the best care possible and staff went above and beyond their expectations with the care provided. Comments included, “Absolutely excellent couldn’t wish for more,” “So safe always feel we can go away knowing [person’s name] is cared for” and “We chose this home because we knew they really care for residents living here.”

The service had systems in place to record safeguarding concerns, accidents and incidents and take necessary action as required. Staff had received safeguarding training and understood their responsibilities to report unsafe care or abusive practices.

Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. These had been kept under review and were relevant to the care provided.

The premises were regularly checked and maintained by the provider. Equipment and services used at King Charles Court were regularly checked by competent people to ensure they were safe to use.

The environment was warm throughout, homely and welcoming. People frequently told us this was a ‘homely’ place to live and visit. People’s rooms were personalised to reflect their individual tastes. As Christmas was approaching some people had been supported to put up Christmas decorations in their rooms. The focus of the service was to treat people with kindness, compassion and respect and this was witnessed throughout the inspection.

The design of the building and facilities were appropriate for the care and support provided. One of two bathrooms was currently being used for storage of equipment. However, the registered manager informed us of the plans to redesign this bathroom in the near future so it is more suitable for people with limited mobility.

People visiting the service told us they were made welcome by friendly and caring staff and had unrestricted access to their relatives. They told us they were happy with the care provided and had no concerns about their relatives safety.

The service had sufficient staffing levels in place to provi

Inspection carried out on 29 September 2015

During a routine inspection

This inspection took place on 29 September 2015 and was an unannounced comprehensive inspection.

The last inspection took place on 22 January 2014. The service was meeting the requirements of the regulations at that time.

King Charles Court is a care home which offers care and support for up to 30 predominantly older people. At the time of the inspection there were 28 people living at the service. Some of these people were living with dementia.

The service had 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.

We looked at how medicines were managed and administered. We found it was always possible to establish if people had received their medicine as prescribed. Regular medicines audits were consistently identifying if any errors occurred.

The service had identified the minimum numbers of staff required to meet people’s needs and these were being met.

Staff were supported by a system of induction training, supervision and appraisals. Staff were aware of how to report any concerns they may have regarding any potential abuse. Staff meetings were held regularly. These allowed staff to air any concerns or suggestions they had regarding the running of the service.

Meals were appetising and people were offered a choice in line with their dietary requirements and preferences. Where necessary staff monitored what people ate to help ensure they stayed healthy.

Care plans were well organised and contained accurate and up to date information. Care planning was reviewed regularly and people’s changing needs recorded. King Charles Court provided individualised nursing care and support to people which achieved extremely good outcomes for people who lived at the service.

Activities were provided both in and outside the service. People were encouraged to be as independent as possible.

The registered manager was supported by a motivated and committed team including the deputy manager, clinincal lead, nurses and the care staff team.

Inspection carried out on 23 January 2014

During an inspection in response to concerns

We carried out this inspection in response to information of concern received relating to a person�s care and their environment at King Charles Court. We spoke with the provider, two managers, the clinical lead, ten staff, four visitors and four people who lived at King Charles Court. We observed care being provided, reviewed care records and documentation related to the service and the staff.

Comments included �I am happy here, the staff are good�, �the food is lovely� and, �can�t think of anything I don�t like�.

We saw there was appropriate care planning documentation used in respect of people who lived at the home. We looked at a range of care documentation which evidenced that people�s needs were well understood and staff acted with respect and care in supporting people appropriately.

We saw people were supported with their meals and drinks. We found staff had attended training in the preparation and handling of food.

We found King Charles Court was warm, tidy and clean. We found people�s rooms were personalised with their own furniture and pictures. We did note a strong odour in one person�s room.

We checked the staff rotas and found there were sufficient staff to meet people�s needs.

Inspection carried out on 27 June 2013

During a routine inspection

During our inspection we spoke with the registered manager, registered provider, three members of staff, seven people who were living in at King Charles Court, and one person who was visiting their relative. People told us the staff were �caring and dedicated�.

Each person had a care plan in place which stated their individual needs. People had access to a range of services including hairdresser, chiropodist and GP�S.

People who used the service, staff and visitors were protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises. People told us their rooms were �nice� and �comfortable�.

The staff were supported by the registered manager. Training had been provided for areas such as manual handling, fire safety and infection control.

The provider had an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people who used the service and others.

Inspection carried out on 15 January 2013

During a routine inspection

We observed staff talking to the people that were in the home in a respectable manner and that staff knocked on peoples bedrooms. We spoke with two people who lived at the home and a visitor people told us they felt the staff were nice and the �care is excellent�.

Staff demonstrated a good knowledge of the care needs of the people that lived at the home. Care plans were in place for all the individuals, however they did not always reflect the specific needs of the person.

One visitor explained that the home had invited them to eat with the person they had been visiting and the food had been �excellent�. We saw people were offered drinks throughout the day.

People were protected from abuse by staff that were knowledgeable about this area.

We saw that appropriate systems were in place for obtaining medicines and for the disposal of unwanted medicines.

Staff stated they felt supported by the manager. We looked at the staff files for four people and saw that there was not an effective system in place to formally supervise all staff. Training had not been provided to all staff.

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