28 May and 3 June 2014
During a routine inspection
Is the service safe?
Is the service effective?
Is the service caring?
Is the service responsive?
Is the service well led?
This is a summary of what we found-
Is the service safe?
CQC monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) which applies to care homes. Management and care staff understand their responsibilities under the DoLS Codes of Practice.
Risks relating to care, treatment and support had been appropriately assessed and were being managed well to keep people safe from accidental harm.
Care plans provided evidence of good risk management. For example, information in records provided evidence of staff taking prompt action to prevent people living in the home from losing weight.
The home's equipment had been subject to servicing and maintenance at regular intervals to make sure it was safe to use.
People were not protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider did not have appropriate arrangements in place to manage safe handling and recording of medicines.
Is the service effective?
Staff understood and respected the people they cared for as individuals and provided their care and support in line with each person's choices and preferences.
Systems for dealing with complaints, suggestions and compliments made sure that the views of people using the service and their representatives were responded to by making improvements where appropriate.
Is the service caring?
People living in the home were provided with stimulating and interesting activities, and care and support was in line with good practice guidelines. We saw staff treating people with respect and compassion. A person living in the home told us, "The staff are very kind and helpful you know. I have no complaints about anything."
Is the service responsive?
People living in the home had their needs assessed and their care plans showed us how staff would provide care and support to meet their needs. Care plans also contained some information about individuals' choices and preferences.
We saw staff responding to people's requests for help in a timely and respectful manner. Satisfaction surveys contained positive comments about the standards of service provided. Comments included, "We are very pleased with the care provided and happy with the way our relative has settled in" and "I trust the staff to work in my mother's best interests".
Five of the seven satisfaction surveys contained comments relating to the standard of d'cor and refurbishment in the home, for example, "Feels like the place needs redecorating and updating" and "The d'cor has become tatty over the years." The manager told us they had discussed these comments with the provider, who had made a commitment to implement a rolling programme of redecoration and refurbishment in the home. This provided evidence that the provider considered suggestions for improving the service, which were in the best interests of the people accommodated.
Is the service well-led?
The provider showed us the systems in place to monitor, audit and review the quality of the service provided in Kilpeacon House. We saw that equipment used in the home had been subject to regular servicing and maintenance. The systems used for auditing medication and maintenance of the fabric, fixtures and fittings in the home were less effective. However, the provider took prompt action to repair a bedroom window, an automatic fire door closer and to obtain a new medication fridge, which were issues highlighted during the first day of our inspection.
The management took a positive approach in responding to feedback from people who used the service and their representatives. We saw evidence of the action being taken to learn from incidents and identify where improvements should be made in the best interests of people using the service.