CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Kirkwood Court
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
What inspectors found, October 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, safe care and clear improvements, but medicines errors, incomplete records and unstable leadership needed attention.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 26 July and 1 August 2019. Inspectors spoke with people, relatives and staff, observed care, and checked care, medicines, staffing and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safer medicines processes, suitable training, kind care, activities and improved checks on quality.
The home had improved from Requires Improvement at the previous inspection. The two earlier breaches, about staffing and governance, had been addressed and the provider was no longer in breach.
Staffing had improved
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Staffing levels were more consistent and unplanned absences were covered.
“There were enough staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives were very positive about how staff treated people. Staff knew people well and promoted dignity, family contact and independence.
“People and relatives were very positive when telling us about how staff treated people.” from the report
Activities and community links
People could join daily activities, entertainment, trips and visits into the local community. The home also supported religious and family connections.
“People were supported by staff to go on trips and access the local community.” from the report
Stronger quality checks
The provider and management team had improved audits, monitored people's health and used action plans to deliver improvements.
“They had improved the way they checked on the service.” from the report
Medicines errors
seriousThere had been an increase in medicines errors since the previous inspection. Most involved agency staff who were unfamiliar with the electronic system, although none caused significant harm.
“Medicines were administered by trained staff, however there had been an increase in medicines errors since our last inspection.” from the report
Care records not always updated
needs fixingSome care plans did not reflect changes in people's needs. The registered manager said records would be reviewed.
“People's needs were kept under review, however care records were not always up to date.” from the report
Leadership was not stable
needs fixingThe registered manager shared time between this home and another home. People and relatives were not always clear about who was running the home, and recruitment for a full-time manager was still under way.
“Leadership at the home was not stable.” from the report
Mixed staff feedback
minorStaff gave mixed views about the culture and some said they did not always feel their work was valued. The provider said this would be explored further.
“Other staff told us they did not always feel their work was valued.” from the report
- 01What checks are now used to prevent medicines errors, particularly when agency staff administer medicines?
- 02How quickly are care plans updated when a person's needs change?
- 03Who is the full-time manager responsible for the home now?
- 04How do you make sure staff feel supported and valued?
- 05How are staffing levels and the mix of staff matched to residents' needs?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises, care, staffing, medicines, records and management systems. This explanation was written from the published report of 19 October 2019 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
Kirkwood Court was rated Requires Improvement because staffing, medicines records and management checks were not always reliable, although care was kind and responsive.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection. Inspectors visited on 28 and 29 March and 4 April 2018, then gathered more information by speaking with relatives and staff before finishing on 13 April.
The home was rated Requires Improvement overall. Safe and well-led were also Requires Improvement. Inspectors found that staffing levels were sometimes too low, medicines procedures were not always followed, and care records and audits did not always lead to improvements.
The other three areas were rated Good. People were treated kindly, supported to make choices and maintain their independence, and offered activities, food choices and help from health professionals.
The home had a new manager who was applying to become registered. People, relatives and staff were hopeful about the changes, but staff reported low morale and the provider had been told to improve staffing and governance.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives gave positive feedback about staff. Inspectors saw staff protecting people's privacy, dignity and independence.
“Throughout our inspection, we saw people looked comfortable within the home.” from the report
Good food and support
People were offered choices at meals, drinks and snacks. Staff made referrals to health and social care professionals when needed.
“People were offered choices at each meal and offered drinks and snacks throughout the day.” from the report
Activities and personal wishes
The home provided activities inside and outside, including personalised activities based on people's interests and wishes.
“The home had implemented a 'Three Wishes' project where staff discussed people's interests and hobbies with them to create personalised wishes they would like to achieve.” from the report
End of life support
The home asked people about their wishes for end of life care and worked with health professionals to support people to remain at home where possible.
“Processes were in place to enable people to be cared for with compassion at the end of their lives.” from the report
Staffing levels
seriousStaffing was regularly below the level seen during the inspection. Some people, relatives and staff said there were not enough staff, including at night, and people sometimes waited for help.
“There were not always sufficient numbers of staff to meet people's needs.” from the report
Medicines information
seriousProtocols and care information for some medicines given when needed were missing. Thickening powder was also left unattended in a communal area until inspectors acted.
“Information about some types of 'as required' was not available.” from the report
Incomplete care records
needs fixingCare plans varied in quality and sometimes did not explain how identified needs should be met. An audit had identified missing information, but the actions had not been completed four months later.
“However, assessments were not always linked to care plans.” from the report
Weak follow-through from audits
seriousThe provider had several audits and checks, but these did not always identify or fix staffing, medicines and record-keeping problems.
“Although audits and checks on the service were in place they had not been robust enough to address the issues we highlighted at this inspection.” from the report
Staff morale
needs fixingStaff described low morale, feeling undervalued and concerns about staffing that had not received a satisfactory response. People and staff were positive about the new manager.
“All of the staff we spoke with told us that morale was low.” from the report
- 01How many care staff are on duty during the day and overnight now, and what happens when staff are off sick?
- 02How do you make sure people do not wait too long for help with personal care or the call bell?
- 03How are medicines given only when needed recorded, including the reasons for giving them and the signs staff should look for?
- 04How have you checked that every person's care plan contains clear, current information about their needs?
- 05What changes have been made to staff morale and how can staff raise concerns about staffing?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five key questions, with visits on three dates and further telephone contact with relatives and staff. This explanation was written from the published report of 31 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 Kirkwood Court
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- October 2019Goodcurrent ratingup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- July 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- February 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- September 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- April 2011
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 13 April 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
36 live-in carers within about an hour of Newcastle upon Tyne
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 £950 to £1,160 a week. 30 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.