CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Kingsley Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found good safeguarding, risk management, staffing, recruitment, medicines and infection control. Staff supported people to take positive risks without unnecessarily restricting their independence.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed before they moved in and reviewed afterwards. Staff had relevant training and supervision, and people received support with consent, healthcare and nutrition.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with kindness, dignity and respect. People were involved in decisions, supported to communicate and encouraged to remain independent.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and personalised. People had activities based on their interests, support to take part in community life and access to a complaints process.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had a registered manager and inspectors found positive leadership, staff support, partnership working and systems to monitor and improve quality.
What inspectors found, December 2018
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with strong management and no breaches reported.
This was the first inspection of the home. One inspector visited on 1 November 2018 after giving 48 hours' notice. They spoke with people living there, relatives, staff, the manager and a healthcare professional. They also observed daily care and checked care, medicine, staffing, accident, complaint and quality records.
The inspectors found people were safe. Medicines, staffing, recruitment, safeguarding, infection control and risk management were handled well. Staff were trained, supported and able to adapt their approach to people's changing needs.
People received care that was suited to their needs and choices. Staff supported people to make decisions, stay independent, access healthcare, eat well and take part in activities in the home and local community. People were treated with kindness, dignity and respect.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. The provider had applied to increase the number of people living at the home, which was registered for four people at the time.
Positive risk support
Staff supported people to do activities such as evening walks and community trips safely, while protecting their independence.
“Staff had a flexible approach to risk management which ensured good outcomes for people.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors observed trusting relationships and respectful support. People were helped to make choices and remain as independent as possible.
“People were treated with kindness and respect. One person told us they were "very happy" living at the home.” from the report
Personalised activities
Activities reflected people's interests and included community activities, college, charity work, clubs and discos.
“Activities were an important part of people's lives and were led by people's choices.” from the report
Quality monitoring
The home used audits and checks to identify issues, take action and learn from them. Inspectors saw examples involving cleaning products and bathroom flooring.
“Systems and processes were in place to assess, monitor and improve the quality of the service being delivered.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01The home had applied to increase the number of people living there. What would change if that application is approved, including staffing and support arrangements?
- 02How are each person's positive behaviour support plans reviewed when their needs or risks change?
- 03How will you support my relative to make decisions and communicate if they find spoken communication difficult?
- 04What activities and community opportunities would be available for my relative, based on their interests?
- 05How are healthcare needs identified, recorded and followed up after someone moves into the home?
This was an announced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and the overall quality of the home; it was the home's first inspection. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 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.
Every inspection of Kingsley Court
Each visit the CQC has published, newest first, back to the day the home was registered.
- December 2018Goodcurrent ratingSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2017
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 November 2017.
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
28 live-in carers within about an hour of West Sussex
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 £1,170 a week. 23 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
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.