31 January 2019
We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.
This inspection took place on 9 January 2019 and was announced. Twenty four hours notice of the inspection was given because people needed support to manage changes to their routine. We needed to be sure that we reduced any anxiety that people had about our inspection.
The inspection team consisted of one inspector. Before the inspection we reviewed the information about the service the provider had sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also looked at notifications received by the Care Quality Commission. A notification is information about important events, which the provider is required to tell us about by law.
We looked at one person’s care and support records and associated risk assessments. We looked at two people’s medicine records. We observed people spending time with staff. We spoke with the registered manager and three staff members.
Some people were unable to tell us about their experience of care at the service. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.
31 January 2019
Kingsley is a residential care home for nine people with a learning disability or autism. The service is a small converted domestic property. Accommodation is arranged over two floors. There were six people living at the service at the time of our inspection.
At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good.
The registered manager had oversight of the service. They checked that the service met the standards they required and worked to continually improve the support people received.
People were involved in everything that happened at the service. Staff knew people very well and supported them be independent. Staff were kind and caring and treated people with dignity and respect.
Assessments of people’s needs and any risks had been completed. People had planned their support with staff and took managed risks. Staff knew the signs of abuse and were confident to raise any concerns they had with the registered manager. People were not discriminated against and received care tailored to them. People took part in tasks and activities they enjoyed at the service and in the community.
People were supported to remain as fit and healthy as possible. Staff supported people to visit health care professionals for check-ups or if they became unwell. People’s medicines were managed safely. People were supported to plan and prepare balanced meals, of food they liked and met their cultural needs and preferences.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Plans were in place to support people and their relatives to share their wishes and preferences about the care they wanted at the end of their life.
Staff felt supported by the registered manager, they were motivated and felt rewarded by their roles. The registered manager was always available to provide the support and guidance staff needed. Staff worked as a team and supported people in a consistent way. Records in respect of each person were accurate and complete.
There were enough staff to support people in the way they preferred. Staff had completed the training they needed to fulfil their role. Staff were clear about their roles and responsibilities and worked as a team to meet people’s needs. Staff were recruited safely.
The service was clean and well maintained. The building had been adapted to meet people’s needs and make them feel comfortable. People used all areas of the building and grounds and were involved in planning the refurbishment.
A process was in place to investigate and resolve any complaints or concerns received.
The registered manager had informed CQC of significant events that had happened at the service, so we could check that appropriate action had been taken.
Services are required to prominently display their CQC performance rating. The provider had displayed the rating in the entrance hall.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.