CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Kirkstall Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, March 2021
Kirkstall Court was rated Good overall; this targeted inspection found good infection control arrangements but did not rate other areas.
Inspectors visited on 3 March 2021. This was an announced, targeted inspection during the coronavirus pandemic. It focused on infection prevention and control in the home.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing visitors, shielding, social distancing, admissions, protective equipment, testing, hygiene and infection outbreaks. They also found that the infection control policy was up to date.
The home was closed to visitors except health professionals. Other appointments used telephone calls, video calls or window visits. People who were shielding received activity support and easy-read information.
The overall service rating was Good. Safe was inspected but not rated. This report did not assess or change ratings for the other areas of care.
Infection control
Inspectors were assured that infection prevention and control arrangements covered visitors, admissions, protective equipment, hygiene and outbreak management.
“We were assured that the provider was making sure infection outbreaks can be effectively prevented or managed.” from the report
Strong audit result
The home had a high result in its most recent infection control audit.
“The care home was rated 98% in their most recent infection control audit.” from the report
Regular testing
People living in the home and staff were regularly tested under the current COVID-19 testing programme.
“Staff and people were regularly tested in line with the government's current COVID-19 testing programme.” from the report
Support for shielding
People who were shielding received activity support and information in an accessible format.
“People shielding were provided with activity support to ensure the person feels secure and with easy read information on recent National updates.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How has the 98% infection control audit result been followed up since the inspection?
- 02How often are people living here and staff tested now?
- 03What is the current policy on visitors and appointments that do not require direct contact?
- 04How do you support people who need to shield, and what information is available in an easy-read format?
- 05Can you show me the home's current infection prevention and control policy and explain how outbreaks would be managed?
This was an announced, targeted inspection of infection prevention and control during the coronavirus pandemic; Safe was inspected but not rated, and the other areas were not assessed in this report. This explanation was written from the published report of 16 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, March 2018
Kirkstall Court was rated Good; inspectors found caring, safe and well-managed support, with previous medicines problems improved.
This was a comprehensive inspection. Inspectors visited on 7 and 14 November 2017. The first visit was unannounced and the second was announced. They spoke with people living at the home, relatives and staff, observed care, checked the building and reviewed care, medicines, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe and cared for. Inspectors found enough suitably checked staff, safe medicines systems, suitable training, respectful care and detailed care plans.
The home supports people with Korsakoff's syndrome and aims to help people regain independence and return to the community. Inspectors found evidence of rehabilitation, support with health needs, good end-of-life care and regular checks on service quality.
At the previous inspection in August 2015, Safe was rated Requires Improvement because medicines practice needed to improve. Inspectors said the required improvements had been made at this inspection.
Improved medicines safety
The previous problem with medicines practice had been addressed. Inspectors found medicines were generally given as prescribed and controlled-drug records were accurate.
“At this inspection we found the required improvements had been made and the service was now safe.” from the report
Personalised rehabilitation
Care plans included personal goals and records showed progress towards greater independence. The home supported people to develop daily living skills and work towards living in the community.
“The main aim of the service was to rehabilitate people to live back in the community.” from the report
Detailed care planning
The care plans reviewed were comprehensive, current and regularly updated. They included people's history, preferences, health needs and progress.
“The care plans we looked at were comprehensive, up to date and reviewed regularly to make sure any changes in people's needs were identified.” from the report
Strong oversight
The management team used regular audits, meetings and feedback to monitor quality. Inspectors found action had been taken when shortfalls were identified.
“There were robust systems in place to look at the quality of the service and action was taken where shortfalls were identified.” from the report
Some medicines recording gaps
needs fixingInspectors found occasional gaps in recording one person's cream and another person's fortified drink. They judged the impact to have been minimal, but this is still an area to check.
“However, we identified occasional gaps in the recording of one person's cream and another person's fortified drink.” from the report
Not everyone knew the complaints process
minorPeople could raise concerns with staff or the manager, and complaints were investigated. However, not everyone knew about the formal complaints procedure.
“People told us they were able to make a complaint if needed, but were not all aware of the complaints procedure.” from the report
Limited records after some management visits
minorThe area manager visited monthly, but there was no specific action plan or record showing remedial actions after those visits. Inspectors still found evidence that required improvements had been made.
“There was no specific action plan or record that remedial actions had taken place following these visits, but we found evidence that the required improvements had been made.” from the report
- 01How do you check that creams, fortified drinks and all other medicines are recorded every time?
- 02What action was taken after the occasional medicines recording gaps found by inspectors?
- 03How do you make sure every resident and relative understands the formal complaints procedure?
- 04How are rehabilitation goals agreed, reviewed and shared with families?
- 05How do you record and follow up actions identified during the area manager's monthly visits?
This was a comprehensive inspection covering all five CQC questions, with the overall rating and each question rated Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 17 March 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 Kirkstall Court
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- March 2021Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2018Goodstayed Good
- September 2015GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- August 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 4 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 Leeds
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 £1,250 a week. 89 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“Carla has been a god send with the implementation of bringing mum back home from respite care.”
“Took his time to learn about me read my care plan and to listen to me. great companionship with lots of laughing.”
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.