CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Kahanah House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe, staffing levels were sufficient and risks to health and wellbeing were reviewed. Medicines were generally managed safely, but inspectors found one missed medicine-record signature.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and care plans were updated as staff got to know them. Staff were supported with supervision and qualifications, although some safeguarding, Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards training was still pending.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff understood people well and offered calm, empathetic support. People were involved in care planning and supported to maintain privacy, dignity and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans described people's needs, communication preferences and choices. People were offered personalised activities, community access and support to keep in touch with family and friends.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had an open atmosphere, clear responsibilities and systems to monitor care, medicines and cleaning. People, staff, relatives and professionals were involved or consulted about the service.
What inspectors found, July 2021
Kahanah House rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a few records, training and laundry arrangements to improve.
This was the first planned inspection since the service registered in 2020. One inspector visited on 25 June 2021, spoke with five people, staff and a health professional, and contacted relatives and other professionals afterwards.
All five areas were rated Good: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. People said they felt safe and were very happy living in the home. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines processes, good infection control, personalised care plans and kind support.
There were some improvements still needed. One medicine record had a missed signature, laundry equipment was in an unsuitable area, some staff training was still pending, and end-of-life plans contained limited information. The home told inspectors it would take action.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe and could speak up about worries. Staff understood safeguarding procedures and risks to people's health and wellbeing.
“People told us they felt safe. They were confident they could speak out if they had any concerns or worries and knew who to speak with.” from the report
Kind and understanding staff
Staff knew people well and responded to anxiety or distress in ways that suited each person. Relatives and professionals also described the care positively.
“The staff were caring and empathic and helped people to achieve positive outcomes.” from the report
Support for independence
People were encouraged to learn new skills, use local services and lead active lives. Inspectors saw evidence that support had helped people move towards living independently.
“People were supported to gain new skills and work towards gaining greater independence.” from the report
Personalised choices
People helped shape their care plans, menus, activities and the home environment. Staff supported individual communication needs and personal preferences.
“People were involved and consulted about all aspects of daily life in the home.” from the report
Good partnership working
The home worked closely with health and social care professionals and relatives to support people's health and wellbeing.
“There was a close working relationship with all relevant local agencies to ensure people received the best possible care and treatment.” from the report
Medicine records
needs fixingInspectors found one missed signature on a medicine administration record. Other records showed the medicine had been given, and the home said it would act to prevent this happening again.
“We noted one example of missed signatures on the MAR, although we assured by the daily electronic care notes that the medicine had been administered.” from the report
Laundry location
needs fixingThe washing machine and tumble dryer were next to a toilet in an area originally intended as an en-suite bedroom. The home said it planned to move the laundry.
“The washing machine and tumble dryer were situated in the en-suite area next to a toilet.” from the report
Training still pending
needs fixingSome staff had not yet received updated training on safeguarding, the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Training had been booked or workbooks provided.
“Staff had not received updated training on the MCA since starting at Kahanah House, although this training was booked to take place in the very near future.” from the report
End-of-life wishes
minorNo one was near the end of life during the inspection, but end-of-life care plans contained limited information. The home later updated one person's plan after discussing their wishes.
“Care plans contained a section on end of life care, but these contained limited information.” from the report
- 01Have all staff now completed the planned safeguarding, Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards training?
- 02What checks are now used to make sure every medicine administration record is signed correctly?
- 03Has the washing machine and tumble dryer been moved from the en-suite area next to the toilet?
- 04How will you discuss and record each person's wishes about sudden illness, death and end-of-life care?
- 05How often do you review care plans, medicine records and cleaning arrangements, and how do you act on any problems found?
This was the first comprehensive planned inspection of the newly registered care home and covered all five key questions, including infection prevention and control. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 July 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.
Every inspection of Kahanah House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- July 2021Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2020
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 December 2020.
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.