The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Gracewell of Kentford

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Jeddah Way, Kennett, Newmarket, Suffolk, CB8 8JY (01638) 555090

Provided and run by:
Gracewell Healthcare Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile
Important: This care home was run by two companies: WT UK Opco 4 and Gracewell Healthcare Limited. These two companies had a dual registration and were jointly responsible for the services at the home.

All Inspections

21 February 2020

During a routine inspection

About the service

Gracewell of Kentford is a care home providing personal and nursing care to up to 88 older people who may also live with dementia, physical or mental health needs. Accommodation is across three separate floors. At the time of the inspection there were 81 people living at the home.

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

People received planned care which improved their wellbeing from staff who considered and used their knowledge of what mattered to people, to provide person-centred individualised care. People knew they were important and well cared for because the staff took time to understand and get to know them, their histories and celebrated their unique life experiences. We saw positive rapports and strong bonds had developed between the people living at Kentford Manor and the staff supporting them. People using the service told us staff were kind and understanding and relatives told us staff’s kindness also extended to them.

Staff showed commitment to supporting people and spoke with a high degree of warmth about the people they cared for. People were empowered to make their own decisions about the care they wanted, and their relatives were consulted appropriately. Where people needed extra support to make decisions, this was provided by staff who knew people and their preferences well. People were treated with respect and staff were proactive in supporting people’s right to independence and privacy.

Each person had a personalised care plan which had been written from a detailed assessment of their needs and also their choices and views of how they wished to be cared for. People had a wide range of opportunities to do things they enjoyed, based on their preferences. People's communication needs were identified, and assistance was provided to enable people to express themselves in their preferred way. Systems were in place to take learning from any concerns or complaints and people and relatives were confident staff would address these. Staff were supported to provide good care at the end of people’s lives.

Each person had a recorded risk assessment to inform staff how to lessen the risk and care for the person. There were enough staff available to meet people’s needs throughout the day and night. Medicines were managed safely by staff who had received appropriate training. The service was clean and well maintained.

Staff had been provided with training and developed skills which clearly linked to the needs of the people supported at Kentford Manor. People enjoyed their mealtime experiences, which reflected their choices, and people were provided the assistance they required so they would have enough to eat and drink to remain well. Appointments with health and social care professionals were planned and also could be arranged promptly when required. 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.

People and relatives told us the service was well managed because of the experience and caring nature of the senior team and staff. There registered manager met with the senior staff each day and there was a service governance system which included carrying out quality checks to assure care was being carried out safely and to take any action to improve the service as identified.

Rating at last inspection

The last rating for this service was Good, (published 1 September 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

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.

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

13 July 2017

During a routine inspection

Gracewell of Kentford provides nursing and personal care for up to 88 people, some people were living with dementia. At the time of our unannounced inspection of 12 and 13 July 2017 there were 83 people living at the service.

At the last inspection of 17 December 2014 the service was rated Good. At this inspection the service remained Good and met all relevant fundamental standards.

There was a registered manager in post. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People continued to receive safe care. The staff understood how to keep people safe and knew how to report any concerns. Risks to people's health, safety and wellbeing had been assessed and plans for each person were in place. The nursing staff had a clear system to manage and attend to people’s dressings and nursing needs. There were structured arrangements in place for the safe storage, receipt and management of people's medicines.

There continued to be sufficient numbers of qualified nurses and care staff to meet people's assessed needs. There were effective recruitment procedures in place.

People continued to be 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.

The systems in place continued to support people to maintain good health and a nutritious and health diet.

People continued to be treated with understanding dignity and respect for their individual choices and needs. Each person had an individual care plan which had been written with them and relatives as appropriate to identify their needs and how these needs would be met.

The care plans were reviewed on a planned basis and as required as the result of an event. The plans also documented people’s preferences and choices for how they wished to be supported. Activities continued to be planned and were in line with the interests of the people.

There was a complaints procedures in place and a recent change to the monitoring of complaints had emphasised upon the resolution and lessons to be learnt from any complaint.

The registered manager used a number of methods to manage, assess and the monitor the quality of the service. This showed that the service continued to maintain good quality care and identify areas for improvement.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

17 December 2014

During a routine inspection

We carried out this inspection on 17 December 2014 and was unannounced.

Kentford Manor is registered to provide nursing care for up to 88 people and provides care to people with dementia. The service has four units and is based over three floors with a passenger lift and enclosed gardens. At the time of our inspection there were 55 people using the service.

The service had a registered manager in place. 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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

There had been a change in provider within the previous two months of our inspection.

All the people we spoke with who used the service told us they felt safe. Relatives we spoke with informed us that they considered their relatives were safe living at the service. People also told us they were well cared for and the registered manager was kind and compassionate.

We were told by members of staff, there were good relationships between the people who used the service and staff. We saw that procedures were in place to help protect vulnerable adults from abuse. The staff had received training about adult safeguarding.

Policies and procedures were in place regarding medication. We looked at the medication records storage and medication audits. We saw that people who used the service received their medication in a timely and safe manner.

People we spoke with all felt that the staff had the skills and knowledge to provide the care that they needed. The training records of the staff employed by the service showed that staff had received mandatory training and training was planned at regular appropriate intervals in 2015. We saw there was an induction process and staff told us they received training, supervision and a yearly appraisal.

We saw that the health of people who used the service was monitored and that changes to peoples care needs were communicated both verbally at handovers and recorded in the care records. People who used the service and their relatives informed us that the service communicated with them and they felt involved in the planning and review process.

We saw that the registered manager and staff all taken part in training with regard to the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We saw that people had been assessed regarding their capacity and when appropriate referrals had been made to the Local Authority.

From the care records we looked at, we understood that people who used the service had their weight regularly recorded. When concerns had been raised appropriate action regarding nutrition and fluid intake had been encouraged and recorded.

When we asked people who used the service and their relatives about the food they all thought there was sufficient food with a variety of choice and snacks were also available.

The interactions we saw between the staff and people who lived at the service were positive and understanding. The care plans we saw had information about people’s life histories and their preferences. We looked at seven care plans and found them each to be personalised and clearly identified the person’s needs and how care was to be delivered.

During our inspection we saw people who used the service had been involved with planning activities, this included cooking and baking in the morning, as well as activities arranged on the spur of the moment to respond to the people’s choices at the time. This also included planned activities which had been planned in response to individual needs and enjoyment such as reading to stimulate people’s memories.

The service had systems and checks in place to monitor the quality of the care and service provided. We saw audits and surveys and records how that demonstrated how the service worked with other professionals including Doctors and Chiropodists.