You are here

Kingsmead Care Centre Requires improvement

We are carrying out a review of quality at Kingsmead Care Centre. We will publish a report when our review is complete. Find out more about our inspection reports.

Inspection Summary

Overall summary & rating

Requires improvement

Updated 13 February 2020

About the service:

Kingsmead Care Centre is a care home providing personal and nursing care to people with a range of needs in two units, both of which are located in one building. Kingsmead Haven provides nursing care and accommodation for people with a learning disability, physical disability and/or acquired brain injury and other complex needs. The nursing unit provides nursing care and accommodation for older people with a variety of healthcare needs and physical frailties including some people living with dementia. At the time of the inspection, nine people were receiving care in Kingsmead Haven and 11 people were receiving care in the nursing unit. The support can support up to 34 people.

Kingsmead Care Centre is owned and operated by the provider Sussex Healthcare. Services operated by Sussex Healthcare have been subject to a period of increased monitoring and support by local authority commissioners. Due to concerns raised about the provider, Sussex Healthcare is currently subject to a police investigation. This does not include Kingsmead Care Centre, but the investigation is on-going, and no conclusions have yet been reached.

Kingsmead Care Centre had been built and registered before the CQC policy for providers of learning disability or autism services 'Registering the Right Support' (RRS) had been published. The guidance and values included in the RRS policy advocate choice and promotion of independence and inclusion, so people using learning disability or autism services can live as ordinary a life as any other citizen.

Kingsmead Care Centre requires further development to be able to deliver support for people that is consistent with the values that underpin RRS. For example, the care planning process did not always consider people’s goals, aspirations or promotion of independence.

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

Risks to people were not always assessed and mitigated. For example, risks associated with behaviours which challenge and moving and handling. People were not always supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives. The application of the Mental Capacity 2005 was inconsistent and capacity assessments were not always completed in line with legislation or in a person-centred way.

The provision of activities required further development. Activities were not consistently meaningful or tailored to people’s needs. The care planning process required further development to ensure people’s social and emotional needs were understood and met. Further work was required to ensure information about people’s care and treatment was always made available in the most accessible way. Staff were responsive to people’s needs, however, we observed an interaction whereby staff failed to recognise that a person was in distress.

Quality assurance frameworks were in place; however, these were not consistently effective in driving improvement or identifying shortfalls. Accurate documentation was not consistently maintained.

People told us that they felt safe living at Kingsmead Care Centre. Staff had received training on safeguarding adults and understood their roles and responsibilities to safeguard people from harm or abuse. The manager worked in partnership with healthcare professionals and learning was derived from incident, accidents and safeguarding concerns.

Staff felt supported and had access to a range of training. People’s nutritional needs were met and people spoke highly of the food provided. Risks associated with catheter care, constipation and diabetes were managed well. People had ongoing access to healthcare professionals and staff recognised and responded well to signs that a person’s health might be deteriorating.

Staff knew people well and demonstrated warmth towards the people they supported. People were involved in day to day decisions about their care and relatives could visit at any time.

A complaints policy was available in an accessible format and peop

Inspection areas


Requires improvement

Updated 13 February 2020

The service was not always Safe.

Details are in our Safe findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 13 February 2020

The service was not always Effective.

Details are in our Effective findings below.



Updated 13 February 2020

The service was Caring.

Details are in our Caring findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 13 February 2020

The service was not always Responsive.

Details are in our Responsive findings below.


Requires improvement

Updated 13 February 2020

The service was not consistently Well-Led.

Details are in our Well-Led findings below.