Kensington House

Kensington House is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to 24 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. At the time of the inspection nursing care was not being provided. The service can support up to 30 people.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were protected from the risk of abuse and care staff knew how to identify and report any concerns. People’s risks associated with their care and support had been identified and staff knew how to provide care safely. People received their medicines as needed and these were managed by care staff. The provider updated the controlled register following the inspection in line with best practice guidance. There were enough staff to give people the gave and support they wanted or needed.

People’s care needs had been identified and reviewed. Care staff were trained and supported in the role so they were able provide the care people needed. People liked the meals offered and where needed were assisted by care staff to maintain a healthy weight. Health and care professional had been contact and advice followed to promote their care needs.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

There was clear management team in place who people and staff knew and trusted .The registered manager made regular checks to make sure people were happy with their care.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection and update

The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 16 August 2019). The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.

Why we inspected

We carried out an unannounced comprehensive inspection of this service on 23 January 2019. Two breaches of legal requirements were found. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve safe care and treatment and good governance.

We undertook this focused inspection to check they had followed their action plan and to confirm they now met legal requirements. This report only covers our findings in relation to the Key Questions safe, effective and well-led which contain those requirements.

The ratings from the previous comprehensive inspection for those key questions not looked at on this occasion were used in calculating the overall rating at this inspection. The overall rating for the service has changed from requires improvement to good. This is based on the findings at this inspection.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Kensington House on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

People's experience of using this service: Sufficient evidence was not available at the time of the inspection, to verify that safety checks and tests were carried out in relation to the premises. New checks and tests on the electrical installations, gas and legionella were carried out following our inspection. Aspects of the environment did not always meet best practice guidance for people living with dementia. We have made a recommendation about this.

Quality assurance systems were in place. However, in some cases they had failed to identify issues.

People we spoke with told us they felt safe living at Kensington House and staff supported them well. There were enough staff deployed to meet people’s needs.

Medicines were managed safely.

Staff were knowledgeable about people’s dietary needs and information was shared with catering staff. Food looked appetising. However, we did receive feedback that it was not always served at a hot temperature.

People were supported with their health needs. People were referred to other health and social care professionals when required and were supported with their emotional well-being.

Staff we spoke with told us they felt supported by the registered manager.

Activities were available for people. We did receive feedback that activities were repetitive. Staff told us of ways in which they planned to develop activities using technology.

Most care plans were detailed and recorded person-centred information. End of life care plans need to be developed to include people’s wishes.

Why we inspected: This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection.

Rating at the last inspection: The service was rated as good. The report was published in June 2016.

Enforcement: Please see the ‘action we have told the provider to take’ section towards the end of the report.

Follow up: We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If any concerning information is received we may inspect sooner.

The home provides accommodation for a maximum of 30 people requiring personal care. There were 30 people living there at the time of the inspection. A registered manager was in post when we inspected the service. 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 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People felt safe around care staff and looked comfortable in their company. Care staff understood how to keep people safe and knew what they should do if they had any concerns. Staff were also aware that they could report concerns to the manager or any of the management team. Care staff understood people’s health and the risks to their health. They recognised people’s individual risks, the signs to be aware of and what action to take. People had access to care staff when they needed it and care staff also felt staffing levels were adequate. The registered provider had systems to assure themselves of the suitability of care staff they employed. Regular checks of people’s medications ensured people received their medications as they should.

Staff were able to access training and support to help them understand how to care for people living in the home. People had regular supervisions with their manager and received feedback on their performance. Staff understood how to obtain people’s consent and the unit manager understood their role and obligations for ensuring people’s decision making was accurately recorded. People received choices in their meals and were supported to maintain a healthy diet. People were able to access additional medical help when they required this.

People felt well cared for by care staff and involved in their day to day decisions about their care. Care staff knew about people’s backgrounds and this helped them respond to people’s individual care needs. Care staff showed compassion, dignity and respect when supporting people.

People were offered opportunities to participate in activities of their choice. People were supported by staff to participate in their individual preferences if needed. People knew who they could complain to if they needed to and understood the process for doing so.

People knew the unit manager and felt able to approach her and chat with her. Staff also felt supported by the unit manager and felt part of a team. People’s care was routinely monitored and the unit manager followed the registered provider’s systems for monitoring and updating people’s care. The registered manager worked closely with the unit manager to ensure all necessary checks were made to people’s care.