CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Kahala Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured about shielding, social distancing, safe admissions, protective equipment, testing, hygiene, outbreak management and the infection control policy.
- Effective?
- Good
- This was not rated or assessed in the report.
- Caring?
- Good
- This was not rated or assessed in the report.
- Responsive?
- Good
- This was not rated or assessed in the report.
- Well-led?
- Good
- This was not rated or assessed in the report.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors were assured about infection prevention and control during the pandemic.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 10 February 2021. It looked at how the home was preventing and controlling infections linked to COVID-19.
Inspectors found good practice in visiting arrangements, protective equipment, social distancing and support for people to keep in touch with families. Staff had infection control training and regular checks of their practice.
The home had plans for safe admissions, testing, isolation and protecting staff at higher risk. Inspectors were assured that the infection control policy was up to date and that outbreaks could be prevented or managed.
The home was inspected but not rated. This report does not give an overall quality rating or ratings for most of the five key questions.
Safe visiting arrangements
The home used a specially designed visiting pod where possible. When visits were not possible, people were supported to use telephone or video calls.
“People were supported to see their visitors in the specially designed pod or when this was not possible people were supported to speak to their families on the phone or via video call.” from the report
Staff infection control training
Staff had training in infection prevention, handwashing and the safe use of protective equipment. Their practice was checked regularly.
“Staff had completed training, including IPC training, handwashing training and donning and doffing training.” from the report
Plans for infections and admissions
The home had a policy for people arriving from the community or hospital. Staff knew how to isolate people with symptoms quickly.
“Staff were trained and knew how to immediately isolate individuals with symptoms to avoid the virus spreading to other residents and staff members.” from the report
Protection for higher-risk staff
Staff in higher-risk groups had risk assessments and adjustments. Plans were in place to protect them during an outbreak.
“All staff in high risk groups have been risk assessed, and adjustments have been made.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How have your infection prevention and control arrangements changed since the inspection in February 2021?
- 02How do you currently manage visits when there is an infection risk or outbreak?
- 03How do you test residents and staff, and how quickly can someone with symptoms be isolated?
- 04How often are staff’s infection control skills checked now?
- 05What arrangements are in place to protect staff and residents who are at higher risk during an outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic, so it did not provide a full rating of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 March 2021 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, May 2018
Kahala Court was rated Good overall; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care, with a manager still awaiting registration.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 31 March 2018. One inspector spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff, managers and external healthcare professionals. They also looked around the home, observed care, checked medicines and meals, and reviewed care records and other documents.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found that people were protected from identified risks, received their medicines safely, and had enough staff and suitable support. Staff were described as kind and respectful, and people were supported with food, activities, choices and healthcare.
The overall Good rating remained unchanged from the previous inspection in December 2015. There was a registered manager during the changeover, but the person managing the home at the inspection had not yet completed registration.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke highly of staff. Inspectors saw friendly, respectful relationships and a welcoming atmosphere.
“The atmosphere in the home was warm and welcoming.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's needs, preferences, routines and histories. Staff knew people well and gave clear guidance about how to support them.
“Each person's care plan was regularly reviewed and updated to reflect their changing needs.” from the report
Food and healthcare
People spoke positively about the food and were supported to eat and drink in ways that suited them. Referrals to healthcare professionals were made without delay.
“People were referred to outside professionals without delay and the advice provided by them was listened to and used to plan and deliver people's care.” from the report
Manager registration
minorThe person managing the home had not yet registered with the CQC at the time of inspection and was still applying. This was during a change in management.
“The person who was managing the service was not yet registered but was in the process of applying to be.” from the report
Activities still being developed
minorThe home offered a range of activities, but the manager was still working on expanding them and making choices more closely linked to people's histories and preferences.
“The manager was in the process of further developing the activities people had access to and using people's histories and preferences to create more person-centred choices of entertainment.” from the report
- 01Has the manager who was awaiting registration now completed the CQC registration process?
- 02What activities are currently available, and how are they matched to my relative's interests and history?
- 03How will you make sure care plans continue to change when a person's needs change?
- 04How are medicines audits and staff competency checks carried out now?
- 05How can residents and relatives raise concerns, and how are the responses followed up?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises, care, medicines, meals, records, staffing and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 May 2018 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of Kahala Court
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- May 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 27 January 2011.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
17 live-in carers within about an hour of Devon
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £1,020 to £1,270 a week. 15 can care for a couple. 13 years' experience on average.
“She is such a warm and gentle person while being professional and competent at the same time.”
“She looked after my mum, who can be incredibly challenging, so well and so gently, and we always felt confident that my mum was getting the best care available.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.