CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Kirlena House
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine systems, suitable risk assessments and clean premises. Staff knew how to report safeguarding concerns and accidents.
- Effective?
- Good
- People's needs were assessed and care followed relevant guidance. Staff were trained, people received healthcare support and suitable food, and their rights and choices were respected.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff were observed to be kind, compassionate and respectful. People were involved in decisions, supported to remain independent and treated with dignity.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans contained detailed information about people's needs and preferences. Activities were flexible, complaints were investigated and staff understood people's end of life wishes.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Inspectors found a positive and open culture. Audits were used to identify actions for improvement, and people, relatives and staff were invited to give feedback.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Rated Good in all five areas; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with effective management.
This was an unannounced inspection on 22 May 2019. One inspector observed care, spoke with four people, four relatives, a professional, the provider, the manager and three staff. Records and the home were also checked.
The home provided residential personal care for 12 people, including some people living with dementia. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine systems, clean premises and suitable risk assessments. People received support promptly and incidents were investigated.
Inspectors found that staff were trained, knew people's needs and supported choice, dignity and independence. People had suitable food, healthcare support and a range of activities. The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led.
The previous inspection was also rated Good, published on 30 December 2016. This inspection was planned because of that previous rating, and the ratings remained unchanged.
Trained staff
Staff completed induction and received training, supervision and appraisals. Inspectors found they understood people's care and support needs.
“People were supported by trained staff. All staff completed an induction programme when they started work.” from the report
Kind and respectful support
Staff knew people well and respected their privacy, dignity, choices and independence.
“We observed staff talking with them in a respectful way and showing genuine warmth toward people.” from the report
Personalised activities
People could choose from activities that were adapted to their interests and wishes on the day. The report also described entertainment and trips.
“People had opportunities to join with activities that were flexible and tailored to what people wanted on the day.” from the report
Management oversight
The home used audits, feedback and an action plan to monitor quality and make improvements.
“Findings from audits were analysed and actions were taken to drive continuous improvement.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How many people are living in the home now, and how many staff are on duty during the day and at night?
- 02How would you support my relative's specific dementia, health, eating and drinking, or medicine needs?
- 03How are relatives involved in reviewing care plans and sharing changes in their relative's needs?
- 04What activities and outings are currently available, and how are they adapted to each person's interests?
- 05What improvements have been made since the inspection's action plan and the virtual dementia programme were introduced?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the premises and care provided; inspectors reviewed four people's care and medicines records and four staff recruitment records. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 August 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, December 2016
Kirlena House was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with minor medicines recording issues addressed.
This was an unannounced inspection on 10 and 11 November 2016. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a healthcare professional. They also reviewed care files, staff records and management records.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines practices, suitable food and healthcare support, respectful staff, personalised care and regular checks on quality.
The previous inspection had found breaches relating to the Mental Capacity Act and managing health and safety risks. At this inspection, inspectors found significant improvements and said the home had addressed these concerns.
Enough staff
Inspectors found enough staff to meet people's needs. Staff were not rushed and responded promptly when people needed help.
“Throughout the inspection there was a calm atmosphere and staff responded promptly to people who needed support.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Staff took time to explain care, protect people's dignity and provide reassurance. Inspectors saw respectful support with personal care and repositioning.
“Throughout our visit we saw people were treated in a caring and kind way.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, medical information and communication needs. Staff were able to describe the people they supported and followed their guidance.
“People received personalised care and staff we spoke with were knowledgeable about the people they supported.” from the report
Improvement since the last inspection
The home had acted on earlier concerns about mental capacity and safety. Inspectors found the required improvements had been made.
“At this inspection we found that the home had made significant improvements to address the areas of concern and bring the service up to the required standards.” from the report
Minor medicines recording issues
minorAudits had found some minor discrepancies in medicines recording. The home responded with refresher training and an updated medicines policy, so families should still ask how records are checked now.
“following some minor discrepancies within the recording of medication.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that medicines records are complete and accurate after the minor discrepancies found in the audit?
- 02How are risk assessments and care plans reviewed when a person's needs change?
- 03How will you support my relative to make their own decisions and involve family members when they may lack capacity?
- 04What activities and support would be available if my relative preferred to spend time in their room?
- 05How do you check that staff understand people's communication needs and personal care preferences?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection of all five key questions, covering the overall quality and legal requirements of the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 30 December 2016 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 Kirlena House
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- August 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- December 2016Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- June 2015
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 3 June 2015.
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
38 live-in carers within about an hour of Oxfordshire
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 £1,300 a week. 32 can care for a couple. 12 years' experience on average.
“We can all fully relax around Nyarai and she feels like part of our family, which is no mean feat!”
“She was v competent and confident and we felt our mum was safe in her care. She supported us through a difficult time.”
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.