CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Kettonby Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, September 2019
Requires Improvement; inspectors found warm, safe care, but lawful consent and management records needed improvement.
This was an unannounced inspection on 16 and 17 July 2019. Inspectors spoke with relatives, staff and professionals, observed care, and reviewed care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good for Safe, Caring and Responsive. Inspectors found enough trained staff, clean surroundings, safe medicine arrangements, kind relationships and personalised support. People were helped to communicate, make choices, join activities and access the community.
The home was rated Requires Improvement for Effective and Well-led. Decisions about one person's personal and medical care had been made without the required legal authority. Records of actions after incidents were not always complete, and some quality checks did not identify problems.
The overall rating fell from Good at the previous inspection to Requires Improvement. The provider was required to send an action plan, and CQC said it would monitor progress and return to inspect again.
Kind and respectful support
Inspectors saw staff treating people with compassion and supporting their dignity, communication and independence.
“We saw that staff interacted well with people, showing them compassion and genuine fondness.” from the report
Activities and community life
People were supported to take part in activities suited to their interests and to maintain community links. Visitors were welcomed.
“People were supported take part in a wide range of activities in line with their needs and choices.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
There were enough staff, recruitment checks were completed and staff were trained to support people's needs. Medicines were stored and recorded safely.
“People were supported with their medicines by staff who had been trained in the safe administration of medicine.” from the report
Consent and legal authority
seriousDecisions about one person's personal and medical care were made without the required legal authority. This was a breach of Regulation 11 and the relevant care activity was suspended while action was taken.
“The service had failed to ensure that people using the service had given consent before care and treatment was provided.” from the report
Incident records and learning
needs fixingRecords did not always show what action had been taken after incidents. This meant opportunities to reduce the chance of incidents happening again could be missed.
“There were not always records to document actions taken by the registered manager in response to incidents that had occurred.” from the report
Quality checks
needs fixingThe home carried out audits, but these did not always identify problems. Information sharing and reporting processes were also unclear until changes were made.
“The registered manager completed a range of audits and checks to monitor the quality and safety of the service, however, did not always identify when there was an issue.” from the report
Complaint records
minorComplaints were dealt with appropriately, but the records did not always show this clearly. The manager changed the process after inspectors raised the issue.
“We saw the registered manager had responded appropriately to complaints although records did not always reflect this.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that decisions about care and treatment have the correct consent or best-interest legal authority?
- 02What happened after the care activity was suspended, and what evidence can you show that the required legal authorities were obtained?
- 03How are incidents now recorded, reviewed and reported to CQC when necessary?
- 04How do your audits identify missed risks, incident trends and other problems?
- 05How do you make sure complaints and the actions taken in response are fully recorded?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the report comparing the ratings with the previous inspection published on 6 January 2017. This explanation was written from the published report of 25 September 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.
What inspectors found, January 2017
Kettonby House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was an unannounced inspection on 9 December 2016. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, a relative, staff and the manager. They also observed care and reviewed care records, staff files, training, rotas, complaints and quality checks.
The home supported up to four people with learning disabilities, and four people were living there. Inspectors found people were safe, staff understood their needs, medicines were managed safely and staffing levels met people's support needs.
Inspectors found caring and respectful relationships. People were supported to make choices, take part in activities, access healthcare and raise concerns. The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led.
Safety and staffing
Inspectors found that risks were reviewed, staff knew how to protect people from harm and staffing levels provided the support people needed.
“People felt safe and comfortable in the home and staff were clear on their roles and responsibilities to safeguard them.” from the report
Skilled support
Staff received a thorough induction and ongoing training. The home also provided support linked to people's individual communication and learning disability needs.
“The induction was comprehensive and included key topics on Autism, person centred care and de-escalation techniques.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People were treated with kindness and respect. Staff understood their preferences and supported privacy, dignity, independence and personal choices.
“People were treated with kindness, compassion and respect.” from the report
Personalised activities and care
Care plans included people's histories, communication styles and preferences. People were supported to take part in activities and community trips that suited their interests.
“Care plans were detailed and included how people displayed their emotions, what this meant to the individual and how best to support them.” from the report
Open management
People, relatives and staff were encouraged to give feedback. The home used audits and meetings to identify and complete improvements.
“People living in the home, their relatives and staff were confident in the management of the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you provide one-to-one support during waking hours for my relative, and when would two staff be needed in the community?
- 02How do you record and review risks when a person's mobility, communication or needs change?
- 03How would you support my relative to communicate choices about meals, activities and personal care?
- 04How are health appointments, annual health checks and follow-up actions recorded and shared with relatives?
- 05How can relatives give feedback or raise a concern, and how will we be told what action was taken?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions, with ratings given for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This explanation was written from the published report of 6 January 2017 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 Kettonby Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has slipped, from Good to Requires improvement.
- September 2019Requires improvementcurrent ratingdown from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- January 2017GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2016
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 8 July 2016.
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
89 live-in carers within about an hour of North Northamptonshire
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. 76 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“If you bump into her in the night on her way to the bathroom she will still inquire how you are and if everything is alright.”
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.