CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Kings Court Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Inspected but not rated; inspectors found good infection control and support for visiting, activities and communication.
This was an announced, targeted inspection on 3 March 2021. It looked at how the home was preventing and controlling infection during the coronavirus pandemic.
Inspectors found systems for safe visiting, visitor screening and testing, social distancing, safe admissions and regular COVID-19 testing. Staff used personal protective equipment, and training and infection control support were in place.
People were supported to take part in solo and group activities and to keep in touch with relatives through social media. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give an overall quality rating.
Safe visiting
Visitors were screened and tested before entering, with changes to communal areas to support social distancing.
“Systems were in place to allow safe visiting, including screening and testing visitors to reduce any potential infection risk, before they entered the building.” from the report
Infection control
Staff had training in infection prevention and control and the appropriate use of PPE. The home also had an infection control champion.
“Staff wore personal protective equipment (PPE). Training in infection prevention and control measures and the appropriate use of PPE had taken place.” from the report
Activities and family contact
People took part in a range of individual and group activities and were supported to keep in touch with relatives through social media.
“There was a robust activities programme and people were engaged in a variety of solo and group activities.” from the report
Testing and safe admissions
The home had systems for admitting people safely and a regular COVID-19 testing programme for people using the service and staff.
“A regular programme of COVID-19 testing was in place for people and the staff team.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01Have the safe visiting arrangements and visitor screening described in the report changed since the inspection?
- 02How are people supported to keep in touch with relatives now?
- 03What activities are currently available for people who prefer solo activities and for those who enjoy group activities?
- 04How often are people and staff tested for COVID-19 now, and what happens if there is a suspected outbreak?
- 05How are new admissions currently assessed and managed to reduce infection risk?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control, with the Safe question inspected but not rated; the other questions were not covered in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 March 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.
What inspectors found, July 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and person-centred care, with the effective rating improved from Requires Improvement.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 20 June 2018. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a visiting district nurse. They also observed care, looked around the home and checked care, medicines, staff and management records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines support, suitable care plans, trained staff and good access to health services.
People and relatives spoke positively about the home. Inspectors saw kind and respectful interactions, activities that people could choose to join, support for people's food and drink needs, and systems for handling complaints and checking quality.
The home was last rated Good in November 2015. Safe, Caring, Responsive and Well-led remained Good. Effective improved from Requires Improvement because mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions were now properly recorded.
People felt safe
People and relatives said the home was safe. Staff understood how to report safeguarding concerns, and staffing levels were maintained and reviewed against people's needs.
“People told us they felt safe and there were sufficient staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind, respectful care
Inspectors saw warm and friendly relationships. Staff knew people well, respected privacy and dignity, and supported independence.
“Staff consistently interacted with people with warmth and kindness.” from the report
Improved decision-making records
Mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions were recorded properly and related to specific decisions. The home had also made appropriate applications where people might be deprived of their liberty.
“On this visit we saw mental capacity assessments and best interest decisions had been made and recorded, and were decision specific.” from the report
Good management checks
The home completed regular audits and checks covering medicines, care records, infection control and health and safety. Managers also sought views from people, relatives and staff.
“Audits were completed consistently and were up to date for areas such as medicines, care documents, infection control and health and safety.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How do you currently assess and record a person's mental capacity and best-interest decisions?
- 02How do you decide whether there are enough staff for the people living here on each shift?
- 03How are medicines checked, stored and recorded now?
- 04What activities are currently available, and how are residents' individual interests and choices included?
- 05How do you use feedback from residents, relatives and staff to make improvements?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering the home, the care provided and all five CQC ratings. This explanation was written from the published report of 10 July 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.
Every inspection of Kings Court Care Home
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- July 2018Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- October 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 19 October 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
47 live-in carers within about an hour of County Durham
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 £960 to £1,210 a week. 42 can care for a couple. 10 years' experience on average.
“Petty introduced herself to Mum every time she was caring for her and responded very quickly to Mum if she was distressed in the night.”
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.