CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Kenwood House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People had personalised risk assessments, and inspectors found enough staff to support people according to their assessed needs. Medicines were managed safely and staff received regular checks of their medicine skills.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs and choices were assessed and reviewed. Staff supported consent, followed the Mental Capacity Act principles and worked with health professionals when people's needs changed.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff knew people well and treated them with dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions and supported to remain as independent as possible.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's choices and interests. People were supported with activities at home and in the community, and relatives were involved in care planning and reviews.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found an open culture, approachable management and regular quality checks. The home used feedback, audits and meetings to help improve care.
What inspectors found, June 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas they assessed.
This was an unannounced inspection on 23 and 29 April 2019. Inspectors spoke with people using the service, a relative and staff. They reviewed care, medicine and recruitment records, inspected the home and checked how it was managed.
The home supports up to six people with a learning disability and/or autism. Two people lived there during the inspection. Inspectors found that people were supported to make choices, build independence and take part in the local community.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the first inspection since the home was registered in May 2018. The report says legal requirements were met.
Choice and independence
Support was centred on people's choices, goals and independence. Staff helped people take part in the local community and live as independently as possible.
“People's support was centred around their choices, goals and independence.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Inspectors found positive relationships between people and staff. Staff respected privacy and dignity and involved people in decisions about their care.
“People and staff had positive relationships and it was clear that staff knew people well.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Medicine records were accurate, staff were trained and their skills were checked regularly. The manager also carried out medicine audits.
“Medicines were managed safely and people were supported by staff to take their medicines.” from the report
Personalised communication
Staff used different communication methods to help people express choices and feelings. Training included Makaton to support communication.
“Staff used a range of communication methods to make sure people had their choices heard.” from the report
Strong oversight
The manager and provider used audits, feedback and meetings to monitor care and identify improvements.
“There was a robust governance framework in place at the service and the registered manager carried out audits relating the quality of the care provided.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess my relative's needs and adjust staffing if those needs change?
- 02How will you support my relative's preferred way of communicating, including any use of Makaton or other communication tools?
- 03How often will my relative's care plan and risk assessments be reviewed, and how will we be involved?
- 04How will you support my relative to take part in activities and the local community?
- 05How will you involve us in planning and reviewing end of life wishes if this becomes relevant?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises, care, records, staffing, medicines and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 7 June 2019 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 Kenwood House
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- June 2019Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2018
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 May 2018.
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 Stoke-on-Trent
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 £1,190 a week. 93 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
“She's shown compassion, patience and a level of understanding that no other carer has given.”
“She maintained a great environment for mum both with the tidiness and cleanliness of the house and Mum and with her caring and understanding attitude.”
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.