Kings Court Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

Well-led – this means we looked for evidence that service leadership, management and governance assured high-quality, person-centred care; supported learning and innovation; and promoted an open, fair culture.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant the service was consistently managed and well-led. Leaders and the culture they created promoted high-quality, person-centred care.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a shared vision, strategy and culture. This was based on transparency, equity, equality and human rights, diversity and inclusion, engagement, and understanding challenges and the needs of people and their communities. Staff told us they contributed to a kind and supportive culture at the service. One member of staff said, “I feel we provide a caring and safe environment for our residents.”

The provider had inclusive leaders at all levels who understood the context in which they delivered care, treatment and support and embodied the culture and values of their workforce and organisation. Leaders had the skills, knowledge, experience and credibility to lead effectively. They did so with integrity, openness and honesty. People and relatives said they were familiar with the leadership of the service, who had open communication with them. One relative said, “We know [registered manager] and her team really well and get on well with them. They do everything they can to ensure the comfort of [named person].”

The provider fostered a positive culture where people felt they could speak up and their voice would be heard. People and relatives told us they were comfortable raising issues and were confident action would be taken if they did. One relative said, “Things get resolved very quickly.”

The provider valued diversity in their workforce. They worked towards an inclusive and fair culture by improving equality and equity for people who worked for them. Systems were in place to encourage staff feedback, including through staff meetings and the provider’s website.

The provider had clear responsibilities, roles, systems of accountability and good governance. They used these to manage and deliver good quality, sustainable care, treatment and support. They acted on the best information about risk, performance and outcomes, and shared this securely with others when appropriate. A range of audits was carried out to monitor and improve standards at the service. Though these had not identified the issues we found with recording decisions and consent, action was taken when we discussed this with the registered manager.

The provider understood their duty to collaborate and work in partnership, so services worked seamlessly for people. They shared information and learning with partners and collaborated for improvement. Healthcare partners did not raise any concerns about how the service worked in effective partnership with them.

The provider focused on continuous learning, innovation and improvement across the organisation and local system. Staff received regular training, and good practice was shared and discussed at meetings. One member of staff told us, “Communication is key and we are continuing to improve this as best as possible with regular meetings alongside the daily handover.”