Kingsland House

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

There had been changes at the home including the loss of a manager. A new manager was being sought and in the meantime the operations manager was managing the day to day running of the home with the support of a deputy manager. Staff told us the change was a positive one with a stronger leadership style and a manager who demanded good care for people. Relatives told us they thought the new deputy was an asset to the home. The manager explained the audits that were carried out to monitor the care provided. People and relatives were able to feedback about care via frequent meetings, and by surveys. The manager also told us she had an open door policy so people could talk to her at any time and relatives confirmed this.

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.

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Staff told us the acting manager was a strong manager who challenged them in positive ways. Staff were complimentary about the senior staff and felt they were improving care at the home. For example a staff member said “The new manager is just very dedicated. She is telling us things are wrong so we can correct them. I can talk to her, she's very approachable.” The manager told us there had been new staff and some changes made at the home. She told us how they sought and received feedback and said she and the deputy manager were working to resolve past complaints. The manager told us how staff were trained and supervised and monitored using spot checks and supervisions. The manager told us it was important to them that people were happy and they did not want to receive complaints, she said any issues were addressed quickly and thoroughly. The manager talked about the staff and how they understood their roles, but also that they were expected to work as a team and across the whole home as needed. She said staff were told not to rush, as the home was a 24 hour service there was always time for people.

There were audits in place to record and assess aspects and timing of care. The manager told us call bell audits looked at the length of time people waited. The deputy manager told us there were spot checks to look at staff care and whether staff were carrying out care appropriately and following the care plans in place. Care plans were audited monthly to ensure care provided was as currently needed. There were clinical audits in place to record and give oversight of skin tears, falls, and care analysis. There were also training audits, audits to monitor cleanliness and the kitchen and other areas of the home. Data collected was used to reduce risk. The manager completed walk arounds of the home to check daily notes and the cleanliness of the home. The manager had implemented ‘huddles’ during the day for staff communication. There was a dependency checker in place to assure a safe staffing level. The deputy manager said this was a starting point and was flexible if it was felt more staff were needed. The manager explained how staff skill mix was also taken into account. The manager told us they felt the home had a better ‘feel’ to it now, more positive and with better feedback from people and their relatives.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Learning, improvement and innovation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.