CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Kingfishers
Rated Outstanding: inspectors found the home performing exceptionally well.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe and inspectors found suitable safeguarding, risk management, staffing, recruitment, medicines and infection control arrangements. Staff responded promptly to requests for support.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received effective healthcare, nutrition and training support. Staff worked well with health professionals and used detailed care planning to meet people's needs.
- Caring?
- Good
- People were treated with compassion, dignity and respect, and staff knew them well. This rating fell from Outstanding at the previous inspection.
- Responsive?
- Outstanding
- Care was highly personalised and people had many choices about activities and daily life. The home supported community involvement, individual interests and excellent end of life care.
- Well-led?
- Outstanding
- Inspectors found exceptional leadership, an open culture and strong systems for listening to people, supporting staff and improving care. This rating improved from Good at the previous inspection.
What inspectors found, March 2020
Kingfishers rated Outstanding; inspectors found exceptionally personalised care and strong leadership, with the caring rating falling to Good.
This was an unannounced inspection on 17 and 18 December 2019. Inspectors spoke with 15 people, 11 relatives, 18 staff and four visiting professionals. They reviewed care records, medicines records, staff files and management information.
The home was rated Outstanding overall. Safe, Effective and Caring were rated Good. Responsive and Well-led were rated Outstanding. People told inspectors they felt safe, and staff were seen to provide kind, respectful and personalised support.
Inspectors found excellent activities, strong links with the community and outstanding end of life care. Medicines, staffing, training, food and healthcare arrangements were also found to be safe and effective.
Personalised care
Staff knew people's preferences, routines and histories. Care was adapted to individual choices, including activities, food and contact with family.
“People received outstanding care that was based around their individual needs and that ensured care was personalised and responsive.” from the report
End of life support
The home provided dignified and comfortable end of life care. Staff worked with families and professionals to support people's wishes.
“The provider continued to provide outstanding end of life care.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could take part in a wide range of activities, trips and community events. Activities were adapted for people who stayed in their rooms.
“A comprehensive activities plan was displayed around the home showing up to five activities planned for each day including weekends.” from the report
Staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough suitably trained staff, safe recruitment and safe medicines arrangements. Staff were not rushed and responded promptly.
“There were sufficient numbers of qualified, skilled and experienced staff deployed to meet people's needs.” from the report
Leadership and listening
The home had an open culture and involved people, relatives and staff in decisions. Feedback had led to changes such as evening activities.
“The culture of the service was open, transparent and progressive.” from the report
Caring rating fell
minorAlthough inspectors found kind and respectful care, the Caring rating dropped from Outstanding to Good compared with the previous inspection. Families may want to ask how the home is maintaining and improving this aspect of care.
“At this inspection this key question has deteriorated to good.” from the report
- 01The Caring rating fell from Outstanding to Good. What has the home done since the inspection to improve this area?
- 02How does the current staffing level compare with the target staffing ratio, including at night and during staff absence?
- 03Some DoLS authorisations were awaiting local authority assessment. Have all required authorisations and renewals now been completed?
- 04How are people who stay in their rooms offered activities, social contact and opportunities to follow their interests?
- 05How will the home continue to support individual end of life wishes and involve families in those decisions?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided; the previous ratings were also compared. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 March 2020 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. The report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
What inspectors found, June 2017
Rated Outstanding; inspectors found exceptional caring and personalised support, with a small concern about delays to call bells at busy times.
This was an unannounced inspection on 8 and 9 May 2017. Inspectors spoke with people living in the home, relatives, staff and health professionals. They also reviewed care records, staff files, audits, rotas and policies.
The home was rated Outstanding overall. Caring and Responsive were Outstanding. Safe, Effective and Well-led were Good. Inspectors found kind and respectful staff, personalised care, strong end of life support, suitable staffing and safe medicines management.
The home had improved from Good at the previous inspection in March 2015. No concerns were identified at that earlier inspection.
End of life care
The home provided highly compassionate end of life care. It worked with health professionals and made specialist support, medicines and equipment available to keep people comfortable.
“The provider continued to provide outstanding end of life care.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described people's preferences, histories, strengths and choices. Staff knew people as individuals and supported them to make day-to-day decisions.
“People's care plans were person centred and focused on people's strengths and abilities rather than what they were no longer able to do.” from the report
Kind and respectful staff
Staff maintained privacy and dignity, explained what they were doing and encouraged people to remain as independent as possible.
“Staff cared for people in a relaxed, warm and friendly manner.” from the report
Activities and community links
Activities were based on people's interests and abilities. The home also supported links with schools, churches and local charities.
“Activities were tailored to people's interests and abilities.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs, with call bells usually answered quickly. Medicines were stored, given and recorded safely.
“There were enough skilled staff deployed to support people and meet their needs.” from the report
Some evening waits for help
needs fixingOne relative said there could be too few staff in the evening, with waits of up to half an hour when someone needed help. Inspectors also noted that response times were monitored and that most feedback described quick responses.
“There is too few staff in the evening, maybe someone needs the toilet or something then there's a long wait, up to half an hour.” from the report
Extra evacuation equipment suggested
minorA fire safety consultant had no concerns about the home's general safety arrangements but suggested extra evacuation chairs or sledges on the top floor.
“I do feel however that additional evacuation chairs or sledges on the top floor would further ensure the safety of people in an evacuation situation” from the report
- 01How many staff are working in the evening, and what is the usual call bell response time during the busiest periods?
- 02What action has been taken about the reported waits of up to half an hour for help in the evening?
- 03Have additional evacuation chairs or sledges been provided on the top floor since the inspection?
- 04How will you learn about my relative's preferences, history, communication needs and end of life wishes before they move in?
- 05How are activities adapted for people who do not want to join group activities or who are living with dementia?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and the overall rating. This explanation was written from the published report of 22 June 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. The report was longer than we could read in one go; the later sections may not be reflected.
Every inspection of Kingfishers
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has improved, from Good to Outstanding.
- March 2020Outstandingcurrent ratingstayed OutstandingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Outstanding
- June 2017Outstandingup from GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: OutstandingWell-led: Good
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2014Inspected but not rated
- August 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- June 2012
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 1 June 2012.
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
26 live-in carers within about an hour of Hampshire
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 £1,020 to £1,260 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 14 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.