CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Kenneth House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, February 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, with fire safety improvements still needed.
Inspectors visited the home, spoke with one person, two relatives, the manager and staff, and observed people living there. They reviewed care records, medicines, training, safety checks and records about how the home was managed.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: safe, effective, caring, responsive and well-led. Inspectors found that people were supported by staff who knew them well, understood their communication, and treated them with kindness and respect.
The home remained Good compared with the previous inspection. Inspectors found that medicines, care planning, health support, activities and quality checks were managed well. They also identified fire safety improvements needed after an external risk assessment, including more smoke detectors and some fire doors.
Staff knew people well
Staff understood people's needs, preferences and non-verbal ways of communicating. This helped them provide individual support and recognise when people were happy, anxious or distressed.
“For those people who were unable to express their needs and wishes verbally, staff had detailed information about the behaviours, gestures and body language people would display to communicate their needs or emotions.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives gave positive feedback. Inspectors saw staff giving people their full attention and treating them in a natural, kind and respectful way.
“We observed staff interacting with people in a natural and spontaneous manner and saw that staff gave people their full attention during conversations and spoke with them in a kind and respectful way.” from the report
Person-centred activities
People had activities based on their preferences, including day service activities that helped develop or maintain life skills.
“Records showed that the activities planned for people were based on their preferences and what they had selected to participate in.” from the report
Good management checks
The home used audits and meetings to monitor care, safety and the running of the service. Actions were recorded and monitored.
“These checks helped the provider and the manager mitigate risks to people's health, safety and welfare.” from the report
Fire safety work was needed
needs fixingAn external fire risk assessment found that the home needed improvements to meet current fire regulations. This included adding smoke detectors and replacing some doors with fire doors.
“The risk assessment had identified that a number of improvements needed to be made to the property to enable it to meet current fire regulations.” from the report
Complaints information was incomplete
minorThe complaints procedure was available in written and picture formats, but it did not explain how to contact the local authority or the local government ombudsman.
“The procedure did not include contact details for the local authority or the local government ombudsman to whom people could make a complaint.” from the report
- 01Have all the improvements from the external fire risk assessment been completed, including the smoke detectors and fire doors?
- 02When was the work checked and signed off, and can we see the latest fire risk assessment?
- 03How can residents and families contact the local authority or local government ombudsman if they are unhappy?
- 04How will you make sure care plans continue to reflect changes in a person's communication, health needs and preferences?
- 05How are people involved in choosing their activities and weekly meals?
This inspection looked at the overall quality of the home across all five CQC questions, including care, premises, medicines, staff records and management records; the report gives the visit date as 10 January 2018 but also contains a reference to 10 January 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 February 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 Kenneth House
2 rated inspections over 2 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 24 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
40 live-in carers within about an hour of Wirral
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 £1,230 a week. 37 can care for a couple. 8 years' experience on average.
“It was clear that she genuinely cared and her warm approach really helped put our minds at ease.”
“He developed a close affinity with Terence, spending time talking with him before he retired to bed and looking after his needs during the night.”
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.