Archived: Christ the King

The detailed evidence supporting our summary can be read in our full report.

Is the service safe?

People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. Staff were knowledgeable about what might constitute abuse and knew how to escalate any concerns. They had received appropriate training in recognising and preventing abuse.

CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. The registered manager told us that no one at the service had applications submitted under this system. Staff had recently received training in safeguarding, mental capacity assessments and the operation of the DoLS.

Is the service effective?

Care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. Risk assessments had been carried out for each person depending on their abilities and need for support in different areas. Plans were put in place to minimise risks. For example, if someone was at risk of getting hurt when walking about in the local community, then strategies for supporting them while they were out were put in place.

People were protected from the risks of inadequate nutrition and dehydration. People were provided with a choice of suitable and nutritious food and drink. The service identified who might need additional support with their diet through monitoring people's weight. Additional advice from other healthcare professionals, such as the GP or dietitian, was sought if people were at risk of becoming over or underweight.

People were cared for by staff who were supported to deliver care and treatment safely and to an appropriate standard. This was because staff were properly supervised and were asked to attend training courses on a regular basis to keep their skills up to date.

Is the service caring?

We observed staff speaking to the people using the service in a calm, patient, and polite manner. The people using the service were relaxed in their interactions with staff and with the other people using the service. Staff promoted people's well-being by engaging them in a range of activities.

We spoke to four people who were using the service. They were mostly satisfied with the care that they received. One person told us, "I like it here. There are helpful people who work here." Someone else said, "Everyone gets along well with each other. This is a nice, small, homely environment." Another person said, "I am safe living here. I have no worries. I like it here and the staff are all right."

Is the service responsive?

We examined how the service responded to complaints as well as what actions they took in response to any adverse incidents involving people who used the service. We found that the service acted to resolve complaints promptly and carried out investigations in relation to any incidents. Actions were taken to prevent incidents from reoccurring.

Is the service well led?

The provider had effective systems to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received. This included obtaining feedback from people using the service and staff. The registered manager and deputy manager carried out audits, for example of medication used, to ensure the service was safe and the care provided was suitable and effective.