Archived: Kenilworth House

Updated 19 April 2019

The inspection:

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

This inspection was completed by one inspector and one expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. In this instance the support of a family member in residential care.

Service and service type:

Kenilworth House is a care home that accommodates up to 30 older people who may be living with dementia. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

At the time of the inspection there were 26 people living at Kenilworth House.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection:

This inspection took place on 11 March 2019 and was unannounced.

What we did:

Before our inspection visit, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We also reviewed information we held about the service in the form of statutory notifications received from the service and any safeguarding or whistleblowing incidents, which may have occurred. A statutory notification is information about important events, which the provider is required to send us by law.

We asked the local authority and Healthwatch for any information they had which would aid our inspection. We used this information as part of our planning. Local authorities together with other agencies may have responsibility for funding people who used the service and monitoring its quality. Healthwatch is an independent consumer champion, which promotes the views and experiences of people who use health and social care services.

We spoke with two people living at Kenilworth House and nine visitors. We also spent time in the communal areas observing the care and support people received to understand the experiences of those who were not able to talk with us. In addition, we spoke with the registered manager, two nurses, two care workers, one housekeeper and the activities coordinator.

We reviewed a range of records which included two people’s care and medication records. We confirmed the safe recruitment of three staff members and reviewed records relating to the provider's quality monitoring, health and safety and staff training.

Updated 19 April 2019

About the service: Kenilworth House is a home located in Moundsley Hall Care Village. This service provides nursing and personal care for up to 30 people living with dementia.

People’s experience of using this service:

People did not always receive safe and consistent support with their medicines. The provider did not have systems in place to consistently record the support people required with their topical creams.

Although the provider had systems in place to identify and address any unsafe staff members practise these were not consistently followed. There was a lack of appropriate signage to direct people and visitors in the event of an emergency in some parts of the building.

Information confidential to people was not always securely stored and there was inappropriate information contained in individual’s personal files. People’s privacy and dignity was not always respected.

People did not always have personalised care and support plans that reflected their needs and preferences. People did not always have information presented in a way they found accessible. People had mixed experiences of the provider’s complaints process and outcomes were inconsistently provided.

The management team did not have effective quality monitoring processes in place and when areas of improvement were identified these were not followed through to ensure people received good care and support.

People were protected from abuse and ill-treatment as the staff team had been trained to recognise potential signs of abuse and understood what to do to safely support people. Staff members followed effective infection prevention and control procedures.

Staff members were knowledgeable about the relevant legislations that informed their practice and supported the rights of people. People were promptly referred to additional healthcare services when required. People were supported to maintain a healthy diet and had choice regarding food and drink.

People received help and support from a kind and compassionate staff team with whom they had positive relationships. People participated in a range of activities that met their individual choices and preferences which they found interesting and stimulating.

The provider had systems in place to ensure the Care Quality Commission was notified of significant events in a timely manner and in accordance with their registration. The provider, and management team, had good links with the local community which people benefited from.

Rating at last inspection: Good (published 18 June 2016).

Why we inspected:

This was a planned inspection based on the rating at the last inspection, ‘Good.’

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor all intelligence received about the service to ensure the next planned inspection is scheduled accordingly.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk