CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at King Street - Care Home Physical Disabilities
Rated Requires improvement: inspectors found the home was not performing as well as it should and told it what to change.
What inspectors found, December 2018
King Street - Care Home Physical Disabilities was rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care and outstanding support for people's individual lives.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 26 November 2018. The inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff, managers and a visiting health professional. They also checked care records, medicines, recruitment, safety records and meeting records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Caring and Well-led were all rated Good. Inspectors found enough staff, safe premises, suitable training, appropriate medicines support, respectful care and good links with health professionals.
Responsive improved from Good to Outstanding. People were supported to make choices, follow their interests and take part in a wide range of activities inside and outside the home. Inspectors also found that complaints were handled appropriately and that end of life care had been given with great care.
Personal choice
People were supported to pursue personal ambitions and make meaningful choices, including trips, hobbies and changes to their appearance.
“People who lived at King Street were empowered to have as much control in their life as possible.” from the report
Wide range of activities
The home offered many activities inside and outside the home, including cooking, arts and crafts, IT sessions and community events.
“People and staff told us about an incredible amount of activities and interests people had been involved with.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff protect people's privacy, listen to their choices and treat them sensitively during personal care and everyday support.
“Throughout our inspection, we saw staff being sensitive and discreet when supporting people.” from the report
Thoughtful end of life support
Staff made sure a person was not alone in their final days and supported the person's family and friends with care.
“When staff were aware the person only had a short period of time left, they made sure there was always a member of staff with them in their bedroom so they did not die alone.” from the report
Previous medicines errors
seriousThe home had reported two occasions when medicines were not given as they should have been. Management took action and introduced a new electronic medicines system, but families should ask how this is now checked.
“Prior to our inspection visit, we had been informed by the service of two occasions where medicines had not been administered as they should have been.” from the report
Longer waits when staff are absent
needs fixingOne person said they sometimes waited longer for support when staff were ill or on annual leave. Inspectors still found staffing was sufficient during the inspection.
“when staff were ill or on annual leave, they had to wait a bit longer for their needs to be met and this could be 'frustrating'.” from the report
- 01How do you check that medicines are given correctly since the two reported errors?
- 02What happens to people's waiting times when staff are off sick or on annual leave?
- 03How would you support my relative to continue their existing hobbies and try new activities?
- 04How will my relative communicate their choices if they cannot communicate easily by speaking?
- 05How would you involve our family in care decisions and end of life planning?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, and the overall rating remained Good while Responsive improved to Outstanding. This explanation was written from the published report of 20 December 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.
What inspectors found, September 2016
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, and said earlier problems had been put right.
This was an unannounced, comprehensive inspection on 13 July 2016. Inspectors spoke with people using the home, a relative, staff and managers. They also checked care records, medicines records, staff files and quality checks.
All five areas were rated Good. People were found to be safe, treated with respect and supported by staff who understood their needs. Medicines were stored, given and recorded safely, and there were enough staff to meet people's needs.
Care plans reflected people's choices and personal goals. People were supported with meals, health care, activities, relationships, holidays and community involvement. The home also had systems for handling feedback and improving the service.
At the previous inspection in July 2014, the provider had failed to meet requirements about medicines, infection control and quality monitoring. Inspectors said the required improvements had been made by this inspection.
Safe medicines practice
Medicines, including controlled drugs, were securely stored. Records and regular audits showed that medicines were administered and recorded consistently.
“People's medicines were stored and administered in a safe manner.” from the report
Respectful care
Staff knew people's preferences and communication methods. They involved people in decisions and treated them with dignity and respect.
“Staff respected people's wishes and choices and promoted their privacy and dignity.” from the report
Community involvement
People were supported to take part in local activities, maintain relationships, go on holiday and contribute to the running of the home.
“People were part of the community they lived in.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are medicines storage, administration and recording checked now, and what happens if an error is found?
- 02How will you assess and support my relative's specific mobility, skin care, communication and equipment needs?
- 03How are people and their families involved in writing and reviewing care plans?
- 04What activities, community opportunities and holidays could my relative take part in?
- 05How can we raise a concern, and how will we be told what action has been taken?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the previous ratings replaced by the ratings from this inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 September 2016 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 King Street - Care Home Physical Disabilities
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- December 2018Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at King Street - Care Home Physical Disabilities →
- September 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at King Street - Care Home Physical Disabilities →
- January 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2012
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 12 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 Leicestershire
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. 82 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.”
“Together Earther and I supported her to die at home with great dignity and compassion and him to continue with life.”
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.