Kirby House

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

Responsive – this means we looked for evidence that the provider met people’s needs.

At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained good. This meant people’s needs were met through good organisation and delivery.

This service scored 71 (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 made sure people were at the centre of their care and treatment choices and they decided, in partnership with people, how to respond to any relevant changes in people’s needs.

People had person centred care plans, which included information as to people’s preferences, physical, mental, emotional and social needs. This enabled staff to support and care for people in a way that was important to them, valuing and respecting their wishes.

People’s views and that of their relatives was mixed with regards to their involvement in care planning. A person told us, “They ask me about my care every year, we have a meeting.” A relative told us, “I do feel involved in his care, because they keep me informed.” A second relative said, “We’ve not been involved in care planning.”

Staff had an inclusive approach and were aware of how people living with dementia were understood and supported. A staff member told us, “When people are unsettled, if we’re not able to calm them, we walk away, try a new face [a different member of staff].”

The registered manager informed us that they were committed to involving both residents and their families in care planning and decisions, and that reviews were held monthly or in response to changes in need. For those people who lacked capacity, the management team worked with the person’s Power of Attorney to ensure decisions were made in people’s best interest.

The provider understood the diverse health and care needs of people and their local communities, so care was joined-up, flexible and supported choice and continuity.

People’s care and support was well documented and shared effectively within the service and with healthcare professionals. Necessary and timely referrals were made to other agencies where required. The registered manager and staff worked in partnership with healthcare professionals and information had been updated in people’s care plans.

The registered manager informed us that the provider operated a key worker system, where each person was assigned a dedicate key worker with responsibility for coordinating their care. Key workers act as a point of contact for families, ensuring clear and consistent information flow.

The provider supplied appropriate, accurate and up-to-date information in formats that were tailored to individual needs.

The provider was aware of the Accessible Information Standard, and if required was able to provide information in large print, easy read of audio versions. Equipment was used to support communication, for example the use of electronic devices to support effective communication for people who experience difficulties, including hearing and verbal communication.

The registered manager told us they had a person who regularly stayed at Kirby House for respite care, whose first language was not English. Staff had learnt key words to support communication, and used an electronic translation service to support complex communication, to ensure their needs were both understood and met.

The provider made it easy for people to share feedback and ideas, or raise complaints about their care, treatment and support. Staff involved people in decisions about their care and told them what had changed as a result.

The provider had quality assurance procedures which provided opportunities for people’s relatives to share their experience of the service by completing feedback questionnaires. The outcome of the survey carried out in February 2025 were in the main positive, with relatives expressing satisfaction with the care provided. An area identified for improvement was increased activities, with consideration to activities to support people living with dementia and opportunities for people to take part in day trips. In response the service had taken part in a study which focused on the enhancement of dementia care through stimulation. However, feedback during the inspection indicated opportunities for people to go out continued to be of concern to people.

Resident meetings were held. Minutes of recent meetings showed people had been asked to comment upon whether they were treated with dignity and respect, the environment and décor, food quality and choices, and activities.

The outcome of peoples and relatives views were acted upon; however, they were not included within the provider’s service improvement plan, and therefore a missed opportunity to develop the service based on feedback, with clear objectives and timescales for achievement.

People and relatives told us they felt able to raise any concerns and where they had raised concerns these were responded. A person told us, “I have made a complaint once, I can’t remember what it was. I do feel the staff listen to me when I talk to them.” A second person said, “I don’t have any complaints, but if I did have a complaint I would speak to them.” Whilst a relative told us, “I have no complaints about the care home. If I did, I would speak to the manager or the deputy manager.”

The registered manager informed us they had previously used the services of an advocate to support a person and their family to communicate effectively, and address issues sensitively.

The provider made sure that people could access the care, support and treatment they needed when they needed it.

The environment was spacious and free from hazards to support people with mobility needs. A choice of communal rooms meant people could choose between sitting in a quiet lounge or choosing a larger lounge if they chose to spend time with more people.

People were supported to attend health appointments. A person told us, “I can just make an appointment to see the GP if I want to.” Care records confirmed referrals to external health professionals were made in a timely manner. People’s needs were kept under review, which where applicable included the review of funding arrangements.

The provider operated an on-call system, which meant a member of the management team could be contacted by staff for support and guidance in the event of an emergency, or where they had concerns.

Staff and leaders actively listened to information about people who are most likely to experience inequality in experience or outcomes and tailored their care, support and treatment in response to this.

The provider had systems and processes that monitored people’s care and support needs, including health conditions. People’s care plans and records confirmed how people’s care and support was provided, monitored and reviewed.

People and relatives confirmed staff supported them to access the care and treatment they needed. A person told us, “I’ve seen the optician today, he came here to see me.” People and their relatives did not express any concerns in relation to discrimination or inequality.

Managers and staff advocated on behalf of people to ensure they had access to external services and agencies. A relative told us, “The staff in the office are kind; they advocate for dad.” The registered manager informed us staff received training on equality, diversity, inclusion and dementia awareness, which gave staff the skills and understanding to advocate for people effectively when liaising with other professionals.

People were supported to plan for important life changes, so they could have enough time to make informed decisions about their future, including at the end of their life.

People had their advanced wishes regarding receiving treatment if their health deteriorated recorded, and in some instances, this included information as to people’s funeral arrangements. Relatives told us they had been involved in planning for the future, including end of life care. A relative told us, “We have discussed dad’s future care and what would happen if he became ill, he has a ReSPECT (a document which records people’s advanced wishes regarding treatment in the event they unable to do so) and DNACPR (a document which records people’s advanced wishes should they stop breathing) decision recorded.” A second relative said, “We have completed the ReSPECT form and the DNACPR form, we have dotted the I’s and crossed the T’s.”

Staff had received training on end of life care. Staff told us they made sure people were comfortable and respected their wishes when providing end of life care. Staff told us they involved the person’s family, and worked with district nurses who administered end of life medicines, where these had been prescribed.