All inspections: Prince Edward Duke of Kent Court

We spoke with eight people using the service and each person told us that they were asked about what they wanted to do and that their wishes were respected. One person told us that 'It's just like being at home.'

We saw that people had the opportunity to take part in daily activities; at the time of our inspection people were supported to attend a church service. There was a well-stocked library within the home which people had free access to, as well as a hair salon. The majority of people spoken with gave positive feedback. One person commented 'It's first class ' absolutely' and another person told us 'I would recommend this home to anyone.' A third person commented, when asked if they were happy in the home, 'I have been here for many years so I think that gives you my answer.'

Our observations of the home demonstrated to us that it was clean, generally free from any unpleasant odours and that infection control practices were in place.

People were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff.

People's personal records including medical records were accurate and fit for purpose.

Our inspection on 16 May 2012 found failings relating to monitoring the care and welfare of service users in the lounge areas of the service. Our return visit on 31 October 2012 found that the provider had made the required improvements required to comply with the legislation.

People spoken with told us that the changes that have been made meant that staff were in the lounge areas continuously and had made living in the home a lot better. One person commented, 'There is always someone to talk to now.' Another person told us, 'They can spend more time talking to me and always say goodbye now, which I like.'

Staff told us that the changes to handover meant that there was always someone in the lounge area and that people using the service were continually monitored. Staff told us that the people prefer staff to be there all the time and it had improved the atmosphere in the lounge.

We spoke with five people who used the service and observed care given to another eleven people. The people we spoke with were generally very positive about the care they received. One person told us, 'I like living here. The food is very good, the gardens are stunning and I am assisted in staying independent which is important to me.' Another person said, 'I feel lucky to be here. My room is gorgeous and staff are so helpful. However, I would love to get out more, if only into the garden.'

Another person explained, 'The permanent staff are really good, although I have seen a few agency staff and they do not understand how to help me as well. The food is good although the evening meal is served very early and the menu comes round again every 4 weeks. I like to go for a pub lunch, but this has been cancelled frequently in the past 6 months as the communal car has been needed for other things. On the whole, I cannot grumble though ' my main carer is superb.'

A GP who visits the service told us that staff were caring and efficient and that there has been a marked improvement in the care records.

We spoke with a social worker who is involved with the home and they told us that they have no concerns around the way that safeguarding incidents are managed.

We sought out input from a district nurse who regularly visits people using the service. They told us that staff were very helpful and that they followed the advice given by the district nursing service. They stated, 'The dementia unit has improved hugely and is now providing a good service in a pleasant environment.'

These older reports are from our old approaches to inspection, including those from before CQC was created.

Archived: Prince Edward Duke of Kent Court

All Inspections

13 February 2014

During a routine inspection

31 October 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

16 May 2012

During an inspection in response to concerns

Reports under our old system of regulation