We gathered evidence against the outcomes we inspected to help answer our five key questions: Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led? We gathered information from people who used the service by talking with them and observing care practices.Below is a summary of what we found. The summary is based on our observations during the inspection, speaking with people using the service, the staff supporting them and from looking at records.
Is the service safe?
On the day of the inspection we considered the service to be safe
People told us they felt safe. Systems were in place to help the manager and staff team learn from events such as accidents and incidents, complaints, concerns, whistleblowing and investigations. This reduced the risks to people and helped the service to continually improve. Staff showed a good understanding of the care needs of the people they supported.
Kingsleigh alerted the local authority and the Care Quality Commission when notifiable events occurred or they had any concerns regarding people who used the service. Kingsleigh had policies and procedures in relation to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and the associated Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS). This helped to ensure that people's needs were met.
Is the service effective?
On the day of the inspection we considered the service to be effective.
People's health and care needs were assessed with them. During our inspection it was clear from our observations and from speaking with staff, that staff had a good understanding of people's needs.
Specialist dietary needs had been identified where required. Care plans were up-to-date.
We saw that there was good liaison and communication with other professionals and agencies to ensure people's care needs were met.
The quality of recording was seen to have improved since our last inspection enabling care staff to use the information correctly.
Is the service caring?
On the day of the inspection we found the service to be caring.
When speaking with staff it was clear that they genuinely cared for the people they supported.
People's preferences and interests had been recorded and life histories were evident.
Kingsleigh had regular support from the local GP practices and other visiting health professionals. This ensured people received appropriate care in a timely way.
Is the service responsive?
On the day of inspection we considered the service to be responsive.
The care records showed evidence of the lifestyle of the people who lived at Kingsleigh and we observed that staff spent one-to-one time with people throughout the day.
The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received care in a coherent way.
Is the service well-led?
On the day of the inspection we found the service to be well led by the manager.
We met with the manager who was registered with the Care Quality Commission. We saw minutes of regular meetings held with the staff. This showed the management consulted with staff regularly to gain their views and experiences and improve support for people who lived at Kingsleigh House.
The service had a quality assurance system. Staff had a good understanding of the ethos of the home and quality assurance processes that were in place. This helped to ensure that people received a good quality service at all times.