We carried out a review of the data available to us about Kempsfield Residential Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Kempsfield Residential Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Kempsfield Residential Home was providing accommodation and personal care for people with a learning disability at the time of the inspection. The home is located in a residential area with its own gardens.
The service has been developed and designed in line with the principles and values that underpin Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. This ensures that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes. The principles reflect the need for people with learning disabilities and/or autism to live meaningful lives that include control, choice, and independence. People using the service receive planned and co-ordinated person-centred support that is appropriate and inclusive for them.
The service was a large home, bigger than most domestic style properties. It was registered for the support of up to 20 people. Ten people were using the service. This is larger than current best practice guidance. However. the size of the service having a negative impact on people was mitigated by the building design fitting into the residential area. Staff were discouraged from wearing anything that suggested they were care staff when coming and going with people. The provider had recognised the limitations of the building and had well developed plans to build and move people to supported living accommodation in the grounds. All people had been fully consulted about the plans.
The Secretary of State has asked the Care Quality Commission (CQC) to conduct a thematic review and to make recommendations about the use of restrictive interventions in settings that provide care for people with or who might have mental health problems, learning disabilities and/or autism. Thematic reviews look in-depth at specific issues concerning quality of care across the health and social care sectors. They expand our understanding of both good and poor practice and of the potential drivers of improvement. As part of thematic review, we carried out a survey with the registered manager at this inspection. This considered whether the service used any restrictive intervention practices (restraint, seclusion and segregation) when supporting people. The service used positive behaviour support principles to support people in the least restrictive way. No restrictive intervention practices were used.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were provided with a person-centred service, which was responsive to their needs and wishes. People told us they felt safe and staff were kind and caring. Staff understood how to protect people from harm or discrimination and had access to safeguarding adults’ procedures. There were sufficient numbers of staff deployed to meet people's needs and ensure their safety. The provider operated an effective recruitment procedure to ensure prospective staff were suitable to work for the service. The staff carried out risk assessments to enable people to retain their independence and receive care with minimum risk to themselves or others. People were protected from the risks associated with the spread of infection. People received their medicines safely. The provider had arrangements in place for the maintenance and upkeep of the building.
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. People’s needs were assessed prior to them using the service. The provider had appropriate arrangements to ensure staff received training relevant to their role. New staff completed an induction training programme. Staff felt well supported by the management team.
The service applied the principles and values of Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These ensure that people who use the service can live as full a life as possible and achieve the best possible outcomes that include control, choice and independence.
Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect and spent time getting to know them and their specific needs and wishes. Staff spoke with people in a friendly manner and people’s care plans reflected their likes and dislikes. Our observations during inspection, were of positive and warm interactions between staff and people. Staff were motivated and demonstrated a clear commitment to providing dignified and compassionate support. People were supported and encouraged to participate in a range of activities. People had access to a clear complaint’s procedure.
The staff and management team carried out a number of audits to check the quality of the service. The registered manager provided leadership and took into account the views of people, their relatives and staff about the quality of care provided. The registered manager and staff used the feedback to make improvements to the service.
Rating at last inspection
The last rating for this service was good (published 1 February 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.
Kempsfield Residential Home is registered to provide accommodation with personal care to a maximum of 20 people who have a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. There were 11 people living at the home on the day of our inspection.
A registered manager was in post and was present during our inspection. 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 were supported by staff who had received training in and understood how to protect them from any harm and abuse. Staff knew how to and were confident in reporting any concerns they may have about a person's safety.
There was enough staff to keep people safe on the day of our inspection. Checks were completed on potential new staff to make sure they were suitable to work with people living at the home.
Staff had the skills and knowledge to understand and support people's individual needs. These skills were kept up to date through regular training and staff were supported in their roles by managers and their colleagues.
People were supported to have enough to eat and drink and they received the level of support they needed. People had choices of what they ate and alternatives were offered if people did not want what was on the menu.
Staff asked people's permission before they helped them with any care or support. People's right to make their own decisions about their own care and treatment were upheld and supported by staff.
Staff made sure people were involved in their own care and were able to make their own choices.
People were supported by staff who knew them well and had good relationships with them. People were as independent as they could be and staff encouraged and supported this. Staff treated people with kindness and respected people's right to privacy and dignity.
People received care and support that was individual to them and their needs. Changes in people's needs were recognised by staff and their support was adapted to meet these changing needs. Staff supported people to identify and to spend their time how they wanted to.
People were encouraged to give their opinions about the care they received and make suggestions about what they wanted to happen at the home.
There was a friendly and positive environment within the home and staff worked for the benefit of the people who lived there. Management were visible and approachable and monitored the quality of the service provided.