- Care home
Kings Court Care Home
Assessment report published 25 September 2026
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment: 03 June 2026 to 03 July 2026. King's Court Care Home is a residential and nursing care home providing care for older people, including people living with dementia, long-term health conditions and end-of-life care needs. The provider had not established effective systems to assess, monitor and improve the quality and safety of services. Governance arrangements had failed to identify and address a range of concerns relating to staffing oversight, recruitment processes, medicines management, incident management, safeguarding practices and regulatory compliance.
The service was significantly reliant upon agency workers to deliver care. Despite this reliance, the provider could not demonstrate effective oversight of agency staff recruitment, competency, training, deployment or fitness to work. Records relating to agency staffing were inconsistent and incomplete, and the provider was unable to demonstrate that all workers deployed within the service had been subject to appropriate checks or competency assurance processes.
The provider's systems for identifying, investigating and learning from incidents were not consistently effective. Opportunities to identify risks, analyse trends and implement improvements had been missed. We found evidence that management oversight was not sufficiently robust to provide assurance that risks to people were being effectively monitored and mitigated.
Leadership arrangements had been unstable, with one interim manager in place at the service since March 2026. Whilst recent improvements had been made under interim leadership, concerns remained regarding leadership capacity, oversight and the provider's ability to sustain improvement. These failings affected people's experiences of care, particularly in relation to responsiveness, continuity, communication and confidence in leadership.
Whilst many people described compassionate and committed frontline staff, we found significant shortcomings in the systems intended to ensure people consistently received safe, effective and well-led care.
We identified three breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) Regulations 2014 relating to governance, staffing and fit and proper persons employed. As a result of the concerns identified, the Care Quality Commission took enforcement action against the provider. The provider has started taking positive steps to remedy the issues.
People's experience of this service
Feedback received from people using the service and their relatives presented a mixed picture of life at King's Court. Whilst many people spoke positively about the care they received and described staff as kind, caring and respectful, a significant number identified concerns regarding staffing levels, continuity of care, communication and management oversight.
Many people told us they felt safe living at the home and described positive relationships with staff who knew them well. Peoples and relatives consistently praised the compassion and commitment of frontline care and nursing staff. Comments included, "They are kind, caring and very attentive" and "The staff without exception are really good." Several relatives said their family members were treated with dignity and respect and that staff took time to get to know people as individuals.
Many people spoke positively about the environment, which was consistently described as clean, modern and well maintained. Relatives frequently referred to the home as welcoming and comfortable, with several comparing it favourably to other services they had previously experienced. Activities provision was viewed positively by many people, particularly the variety of entertainment, social opportunities and community involvement available to people.
However, concerns were raised by several people regarding staffing arrangements and the impact this had on their experience of care. Several relatives described delays in receiving assistance when call bells were used, particularly during busy periods and weekends. One relative told us, "Sometimes there are only one or two members of staff on the ground floor," whilst another said, "There are not enough staff and they are very busy." Some people reported waiting extended periods for support with personal care or toileting needs.
Continuity of care was a recurring theme. Both people and relatives commented on the high turnover of staff and frequent use of agency or bank workers. Several people told us they valued permanent staff because they knew people well and understood their preferences and needs. One relative said, "There is now a lack of continuity of care in the last three months," whilst another reported that agency staff were often unfamiliar with people and their routines.
Communication was another area where experiences varied. While some relatives reported being kept informed about changes in health needs and incidents, others described communication as inconsistent and reactive. Several relatives told us they often had to chase the service for updates regarding their family member's health and wellbeing. Some said they would have welcomed more regular communication about medical reviews, changes in treatment, healthcare appointments and outcomes.
Feedback regarding food quality was mixed but was one of the most frequently raised concerns. Whilst some people were satisfied with the meals provided, a significant number of people and relatives felt the quality, choice and consistency of food had deteriorated. Several people linked these concerns to ongoing staffing changes within the catering team and the use of temporary chefs.
Despite the concerns identified, many people remained positive about the overall care provided by frontline staff. Several relatives told us they would recommend the service and spoke warmly about the support their family members received. People frequently distinguished between concerns relating to staffing, communication and management, and their appreciation of the efforts of care and nursing staff who they felt worked hard to support people.
Overall, people's experiences reflected a service where many felt safe, respected and cared for by frontline staff. However, concerns relating to staffing stability, responsiveness, communication and leadership affected confidence in the consistency of care provided.