CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Kemsing Road Respite Service
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Risks were assessed and managed, staffing was considered adequate, and staff had safeguarding and medicines training. Some medicines records had unexplained gaps when people left, but the registered manager acted during the inspection.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and reviewed, and staff received induction, ongoing training, supervision and appraisals. The home supported health, nutrition, hydration and decision-making in line with the Mental Capacity Act.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors saw kind and respectful interactions. Care plans recorded people's preferences, independence, cultural and spiritual needs, and preferred staff for personal care.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and personalised. People were supported with communication, activities, relationships, mobility and individual routines, and complaints were handled promptly.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a registered manager, regular audits and staff meetings, and an open culture where concerns could be raised. Relatives and staff spoke positively about how the home was managed.
What inspectors found, March 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care, with a medicines recording gap corrected during the inspection.
Inspectors made an unannounced visit on 31 January 2018. They observed care, spoke with relatives, staff and a healthcare professional, and checked care plans, staff records and management checks.
The home supports up to four people with complex communication needs and profound learning and physical disabilities for respite care. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with dignity, and supported by staff who understood their individual needs.
There was one medicines records problem. Some records did not clearly show when a person had left the home, leaving unexplained gaps. The registered manager corrected this during the inspection.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means the service met the CQC standard for good care at the time of this inspection, and remained Good since the previous inspection in January 2016.
Personalised care
Care plans described people's routines, preferences, communication and support needs in detail. Staff could explain how they supported people as individuals.
“Care plans were person-centred, detailed and specific to each person and their needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors saw staff speaking gently, showing interest in people and responding promptly. People appeared relaxed and comfortable with staff.
“Staff were kind, attentive and spoke in a gentle and pleasant manner to people.” from the report
Safe staffing and risk management
Inspectors found enough staff on the day and saw that risks such as dehydration, medical needs and skin problems had been assessed.
“Risks to people were identified and managed so that people were safe.” from the report
Good staff training
Staff received induction, refresher training and training linked to people's specific needs, including autism, epilepsy, diabetes and moving and handling.
“Records showed staff had received an induction and ongoing training that helped them to meet people's needs.” from the report
Activities and relationships
People were supported to continue activities and community links, and the home supported intimate relationships while assessing related risks.
“People were supported to take part in activities and maintain links with community.” from the report
Regular oversight
Management carried out checks and audits across areas including medicines, infection control, care planning and risk management, with actions recorded where needed.
“The service undertook a range of checks and audits to monitor the quality of the service, and took action to improve the service where needed.” from the report
Medicines records
needs fixingSome medicines administration records had unexplained gaps. The records did not clearly show that a person's stay had ended, so inspectors could not be sure whether medicines had been given as prescribed before departure. The registered manager took action during the inspection.
“However records did not clearly reflect when people's stay had ended resulting in gaps in medicines records.” from the report
- 01How are medicines administration records completed now when someone leaves the home?
- 02How will you check that my relative's medicines are supplied in sufficient amounts and given as prescribed during each respite stay?
- 03How will you update my relative's care plan if their health, communication, mobility or support needs change between stays?
- 04Which staff will support my relative with personal care, and how will you respect any preference about the gender of staff?
- 05What activities and community links could my relative continue during their respite stay?
This was an unannounced inspection of the whole home and all five CQC questions; the previous Good rating from 25 January 2016 was reviewed. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 March 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 Kemsing Road Respite Service
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Kemsing Road Respite Service →
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2014
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 16 May 2014.
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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Greenwich
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 £980 to £1,250 a week. 87 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She cared for my mum with Alzheimer's with endless patience and kindness, always arriving with a smile and a positive attitude”
“Usha rapidly became 'one of the family' and is sorely missed.”
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.