CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Kingston House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Inspectors found suitable risk assessments, safe medicines systems, enough staff, infection-control arrangements and appropriate recruitment checks.
- Effective?
- Good
- People’s needs were assessed and care plans were developed with people and relatives. Staff were trained and supported, people had suitable food and healthcare, and consent and best-interest processes were followed.
- Caring?
- Outstanding
- Staff knew people very well and supported them with exceptional compassion, dignity and respect. People were helped to communicate, make decisions and become more independent.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans were detailed and personalised. People had daily activities, community opportunities and support for communication, relationships, faith and end-of-life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The home had positive leadership, motivated staff and systems for checking quality and responding to risks. People, relatives, staff and professionals were involved in developing the service.
What inspectors found, February 2020
Kingston House was rated Good overall; inspectors found exceptionally caring support, with the home’s larger-than-guidance size worth discussing.
This was a planned, announced inspection on 10 and 11 December 2019. One inspector visited, spoke with a person, relatives and care professionals, and talked with staff and the manager. They also observed care and reviewed care plans, recruitment files and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Safe, Effective, Responsive and Well-led were rated Good. Caring was rated Outstanding. Inspectors found people were safe, treated with great kindness and respect, and supported to make choices, build confidence and become more independent.
The home provided accommodation and personal care for eight people with learning disabilities and people living with dementia. Inspectors noted that it was larger than current best practice guidance for this type of service, but said the building and its setting reduced any negative effect. The overall rating remained Good, the same as at the previous inspection in 2017.
Exceptionally caring support
Inspectors saw compassionate relationships and a strong focus on people’s dignity, privacy, choices and independence.
“The service was exceptionally caring.” from the report
Communication and involvement
Staff used pictures, photographs, body language and other approaches to help people understand their care and take part in decisions.
“The promotion of choice, communication, understanding and involvement was implemented in a way that significantly improved people's outcomes of care.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans included people’s histories, preferences, communication needs and goals. Staff used this information to provide individual support.
“Detailed individual person-centred care plans had been developed, enabling staff to support people in a personalised way that was specific to their needs and preferences” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people’s needs. Staff were trained to give medicines safely, and medicine records were checked through audits.
“Audits of medicine administration records (MAR) were undertaken to ensure they had been completed correctly, and any errors were investigated.” from the report
Positive leadership
Staff felt supported and worked well as a team. Management used audits, meetings and feedback to monitor the service and improve care.
“The service had a strong emphasis on team work and communication sharing.” from the report
The home is larger than current guidance
minorThe home was described as larger than current best practice guidance for this type of service. Inspectors said the building design and surrounding area helped reduce any negative effect, but families should consider whether the size suits their relative.
“This is larger than current best practice guidance.” from the report
- 01How would you assess and review my relative’s individual communication needs, especially if they cannot easily speak?
- 02How does the home make sure its larger size does not affect people’s sense of home, choice or independence?
- 03What activities and community outings would be suitable for my relative’s interests and abilities?
- 04How would my relative be involved in decisions about health appointments, treatment and medicines?
- 05How do you check that staffing levels, staff training and medicines records remain suitable for the people living here?
This was a planned, announced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including both the premises and the care provided; all five ratings were reviewed. This explanation was written from the published report of 26 February 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.
What inspectors found, June 2017
Kingston House was rated Good overall, with Outstanding caring and inspectors finding safe, personalised support.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 27 March 2017. One inspector reviewed records, medicines, care plans, staffing and safety checks. They observed care and activities, spoke with staff and a person living at the home, and received feedback from health professionals.
The home was rated Good for safe, effective and responsive care, and for being well-led. Caring was rated Outstanding. Inspectors found that staff knew people very well, understood their communication and provided patient, respectful support.
People had detailed care plans and risk assessments. Medicines were managed safely, staff received relevant training, and health professionals were contacted when needed. The home had a stable staff team and systems to check quality and make improvements.
The home was also rated Good overall at the previous inspection on 26 November 2014, with Outstanding caring. All five current ratings remained the same.
Kind and respectful care
Staff were highly caring and treated people with dignity. They took time to understand people's moods, body language and communication.
“People were supported by staff who were highly motivated to offer care that was kind and compassionate.” from the report
Strong knowledge of residents
The stable staff team knew people's histories, preferences and health needs well. This helped staff support daily choices and recognise changes in wellbeing.
“The core staff team was stable, had supported people for many years and knew people extremely well.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
Inspectors found enough staff to support people safely, including at night. Medicines were stored, given and recorded appropriately.
“There were safe systems in place for the management of medicines.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans gave detailed guidance about health, communication, food, activities and daily routines. Activities were adapted for people who found it difficult to go out.
“Care plans contained detailed information and clear guidance about all aspects of a person's health, social and personal care needs to enable staff to care for each person.” from the report
Good oversight
The home used audits, surveys and improvement plans to monitor care. Inspectors found that actions identified through these checks had been completed.
“There were effective systems in place to regularly monitor the quality of service that was provided.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How many staff are normally on duty during the day and night, and how do you cover transfers, personal care, appointments and activities?
- 02How will staff learn and use my relative's communication methods, including body language, facial expressions, pictures or symbols?
- 03How will you manage my relative's specific eating, drinking, swallowing or PEG feeding needs?
- 04What activities and opportunities to go out would be suitable for my relative's health and abilities?
- 05What has changed at the home since the March 2017 inspection, including any changes to the staff team or management?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions and the overall quality of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 29 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.
Every inspection of Kingston House
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- February 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: OutstandingResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- March 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 25 November 2010.
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
39 live-in carers within about an hour of Kent
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. 33 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“Always on time and with a lovely smile for my mum. Theresa is kind and sensitive to my mum's needs.”
“Irene was a very kind and empathetic carer who knew just the right words to say to put a smile on my face.”
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.