CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Kenyon Lodge
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm, and risks were assessed with guidance for staff. Topical creams had sometimes been left accessible in bedrooms, but the home took immediate action after inspectors raised this.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff assessed people's needs, followed care plans and had appropriate training. People were supported with food, healthcare, equipment and decisions about their care.
- Caring?
- Good
- People and relatives said staff were caring and respectful. Staff supported independence, privacy, dignity, equality and involvement in decisions.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's preferences and communication needs. The home offered activities, supported relationships and handled complaints appropriately.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Managers used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor care and make improvements. A new manager was in post and had applied to register, while CQC assessed the application.
What inspectors found, May 2023
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with a short-lived concern about topical creams being left accessible.
Inspectors visited without warning on 18 and 19 April 2023. They spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care and meals, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment, training and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe medicines management, good infection control, personalised care plans and staff who treated people with dignity and respect.
The inspection followed notification of an incident in which a person sustained a serious injury. CQC did not examine that incident itself, but looked at potential falls risks and found no evidence during this inspection that people were at risk of harm from that concern.
Safe staffing and recruitment
Inspectors found staffing levels were adjusted to people's needs and recruitment checks were completed safely.
“Staffing levels were determined by the number of people using the service and their needs and were adjusted accordingly.” from the report
Respect and independence
Staff involved people in decisions and supported them to remain independent while respecting privacy and dignity.
“Support plans described what people could do for themselves and staff prompted this to ensure independence was maintained.” from the report
Open management
The provider investigated complaints, shared information when things went wrong and used audits to monitor improvements.
“Records showed complaints were investigated and apologies given, including confirmation on what action had been taken in response to the concerns raised.” from the report
Topical creams were not always secured
needs fixingSome creams were left accessible in bedrooms, creating a risk that someone could ingest them accidentally. The home took immediate action after inspectors gave feedback.
“Some people required topical creams and these were not always stored safely and were often left accessible in people's bedrooms.” from the report
Recent management change
minorThere was no registered manager in post during the inspection. A new manager had been in post for one week and had applied to register.
“At the time of our inspection there was not a registered manager in post.” from the report
- 01How are topical creams now stored and checked so they cannot be accessed by the wrong person?
- 02What is the current position of the new manager's application to register?
- 03What changes were made after the incident involving a serious injury, and how are falls risks now reviewed?
- 04How will you assess and respond if my relative's care needs or health change?
- 05How can relatives raise concerns, receive updates and take part in care reviews?
This inspection was prompted by a serious injury and potential concerns about falls management; it did not examine the circumstances of that incident, but checked falls risks and reviewed all five key question ratings. This explanation was written from the published report of 11 May 2023 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.
What inspectors found, September 2021
Kenyon Lodge was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and well-organised care, with only minor issues reported.
This was an unannounced inspection on 24 and 26 August 2021. The inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives and staff. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff recruitment and training records, and the home's audits and policies.
The inspectors found that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. There were enough staff, medicines were managed safely, infection control was effective, and risks to people's health were assessed. Staff had the training and information needed to provide care.
People were treated with kindness and respect. Staff knew people's preferences, supported their independence, helped them access healthcare and provided activities and communication support. Managers had systems to monitor quality and respond to concerns.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This was the same overall rating as the previous inspection, published on 15 May 2019.
Safe staffing and risk management
Inspectors saw enough staff available to provide timely care. Risks such as falls, nutrition, moving and handling, and fire had been assessed and managed.
“During our inspection we observed staff constantly interacting with people and there were enough staff available to ensure people received timely care.” from the report
Safe medicines and infection control
Medicines records checked by inspectors were complete, staff were trained and medicines were stored correctly. The home also had arrangements for preventing and managing infection outbreaks.
“The provider had systems in place to ensure people received their medicines as prescribed; people's medicines administration records we looked at were completed correctly.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff knew people's needs and preferences and supported their privacy, dignity, choices and independence.
“We saw people were treated with kindness and were positive about the staff's caring attitude.” from the report
Personalised care and communication
Care plans included people's likes, dislikes, communication needs and areas of independence. The home used pictorial information, communication boards and translation support where needed.
“Person-centred care plans contained specific individual details about people and how they wanted support.” from the report
Strong management oversight
Managers used audits, handovers and staff meetings to monitor quality and follow up issues. They also worked with other organisations involved in people's care.
“The provider had a range of governance systems, tools and processes in place to assess the safety and quality of the service and identify areas for improvement.” from the report
Clothing sometimes went missing
minorOne relative said that items of clothing sometimes went missing. The report does not describe this as a wider or serious problem.
“sometimes items of clothing goes missing which I accept” from the report
- 01How do you prevent residents' clothing and other personal belongings from going missing?
- 02How do you keep relatives informed about their family member's care and health?
- 03How would you assess and manage my relative's specific risks, such as falls, nutrition, mobility or skin care?
- 04What activities would be available that match my relative's interests, communication needs and abilities?
- 05How would you involve my relative and our family in care decisions, including decisions about end of life care?
This was an unannounced inspection of all five key questions, with particular attention to infection prevention and control because of COVID-19; it was also part of a random check of services previously rated Good or Outstanding. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 September 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 Kenyon Lodge
9 rated inspections over 8 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- May 2023Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- September 2021Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2019Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2018Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- December 2017Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- January 2017Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- July 2016Requires improvementup from InadequateSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Good
- January 2016Inadequatedown from Requires improvementSafe: InadequateEffective: InadequateCaring: InadequateResponsive: InadequateWell-led: Inadequate
- June 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 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
At least 100 live-in carers within about an hour of Salford
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 £1,260 a week. 90 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Primrose is a very kind and compassionate healthcare professional”
“She is an exemplary carer, she is knowledgable empathetic and very respectful in the home.”
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.