Skip to content
The Care Home DirectoryEvery care home in England

CQC report explained · a residential care home

What the CQC found at Kenilworth Care Home

Goodpublished 24 June 2022, 4 years ago

Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.

The five questions inspectors ask
Safe?
Good
People were protected from abuse and risks were assessed and reviewed. Staffing, recruitment, medicines processes and infection control were found to be safe, although medicines records could be confusing.
Effective?
Good
Care plans reflected people's needs and choices, and staff had relevant training and supervision. People were supported with food, healthcare, communication and decisions about their care.
Caring?
Good
Staff were kind and respectful. People were involved in care planning and supported with privacy, dignity, independence and everyday choices.
Responsive?
Good
Support was personalised and flexible. People were helped to communicate, maintain family relationships, access the local community and take part in activities they chose.
Well-led?
Requires improvement
The registered manager and staff were approachable and worked well with others, but quality checks did not find shortcomings in record keeping. Some records were not in date order or easy for staff to access.
The latest report, explained

What inspectors found, June 2022

Kenilworth Care Home was rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, safe and personalised care, but management checks and records needed improvement.

The inspection was unannounced and took place on 4 May 2022. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, staff and a family member. They reviewed care, medicines, recruitment, training and management records.

People were described as safe, respected and supported to make choices and live as independently as possible. Staff knew people well, supported healthcare appointments and helped people take part in household tasks, activities and community life.

The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring and Responsive. It was rated Requires Improvement for Well-led because audits did not identify record-keeping problems, and some care and medicines records were difficult to use. This was the first inspection since the service registered under a new provider in 2019.

What inspectors praised
  • Respectful relationships

    Inspectors saw relaxed and trusting interactions. People and families said staff were kind, respectful and understood how each person preferred to be supported.

    “People were treated with dignity and their privacy was respected. Staff were kind and caring.” from the report
  • Choice and independence

    People helped with household tasks, meal preparation, shopping and gardening. Staff supported people to make choices and access the community while managing risks.

    “People were encouraged to have control in their daily lives and staff encouraged people to live as independently as possible.” from the report
  • Personalised support

    Care plans included people's preferences, communication needs and desired outcomes. Staff adapted support to people's wishes and changing needs.

    “People's care and support needs were reviewed and families and health care professionals were involved where appropriate.” from the report
  • Health support

    People were supported to attend health checks and appointments. The home worked with health professionals and used health action plans and hospital passports.

    “The service worked well with other professionals to ensure people's health needs were met effectively and in a timely manner.” from the report
What inspectors were concerned about
  • Management checks

    needs fixing

    The home's audits did not identify the record-keeping problems found during the inspection. This led to a Requires Improvement rating for Well-led.

    “However, these were not always effective and did not identify concerns found by inspectors.” from the report
  • Care and medicines records

    needs fixing

    Some medicines administration records were recorded inconsistently, which could confuse staff. Care records were not always in chronological order and some older information was mixed with current information.

    “Records relating to people's care were not always kept in good order.” from the report
Questions to ask them, based on this report
  1. 01What changes have been made to medicines administration records since the inspection?
  2. 02How are care plans now organised so staff can quickly find the most recent information?
  3. 03How often are audits completed, and how do you check that they identify record-keeping problems?
  4. 04How will you make sure new or temporary staff understand each person's current risks, needs and preferences?
  5. 05How are people and families involved in reviewing care plans and checking that improvements have been made?

This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including infection prevention and control; it was the first inspection since the service registered under a new provider in 2019. This explanation was written from the published report of 24 June 2022 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.

The story over the years

Every inspection of Kenilworth Care Home

2 rated inspections over 6 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.

  1. June 2022Goodcurrent ratingstayed Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement

    Read what inspectors found at Kenilworth Care Home →

  2. May 2016Good
    Safe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
  3. May 2019

    Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 17 May 2019.

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.

Next steps

Weigh the report against the rest

Care at home

77 live-in carers within about an hour of Surrey

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. 66 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.

“Without his support we wouldn't have been able to navigate bringing and keeping Dad at home.”
Emma P., about Aman A.
“Not only has she looked after him beautifully, she has also been great company for him with lively conversation, kindness and humour.”
Clare M., about Zion S.
See live-in carers near SurreyProfiles, rates and reviews are free to look at.

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.