CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Kite Hill Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- Inspectors were assured that infection risks were being managed. This included PPE, visiting, testing, admissions, social distancing, hygiene and outbreak planning.
- Effective?
- Good
- Does the care work? Training, consent, food and drink, working with GPs and nurses.
- Caring?
- Good
- Are people treated with kindness and dignity?
- Responsive?
- Good
- Is care built around the person? Care plans, activities, complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- Is the home run well? The manager, the culture, how problems get found and fixed.
What inspectors found, September 2020
Kite Hill Care Home was inspected but not rated; inspectors found strong infection control arrangements during the coronavirus pandemic.
The inspection took place on 07 August 2020. It was an announced, targeted inspection looking only at infection prevention and control measures as part of a coronavirus-related review.
Inspectors found clear processes for staff and visitors, including signs about personal protective equipment, PPE stations and safe visiting arrangements. The home was clean, and changes had been made to support social distancing.
Inspectors were assured that the home was managing infection risks, including admissions, testing, shielding, social distancing and possible outbreaks. The service was inspected but not rated, so this report does not give a full overall rating of the care provided.
Clear PPE arrangements
The home had prominent signs, a designated area for putting on and removing PPE, and PPE stations across the building.
“There were very clear infection control processes in place for staff and essential visitors to the premises.” from the report
Safe visiting
Visits used the outside space, were spaced out and included information to help relatives maintain people's safety.
“There were safe visiting arrangements for people and their relatives, which utilised the outside space at the service.” from the report
Social distancing
Seating was spaced out and people were divided into two groups using communal areas on different days to reduce mixing.
“Changes to the environment had been considered and acted upon in order to comply with social distancing as much as possible.” from the report
Clean environment
Inspectors found the home very clean, with handwashing and PPE reminders in communal areas, bathrooms and bedrooms.
“The service was very clean and there were PPE stations throughout the communal areas, in every bathroom and in each person's bedroom.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How are visits arranged now, and what information will relatives receive about keeping people safe?
- 02How do you support residents who need to self-isolate, and how do you reduce the effect of isolation on them?
- 03How are communal areas organised to reduce mixing between residents?
- 04How do you make sure staff and visitors use PPE correctly?
- 05How do you access testing for residents and staff, and how would you manage an infection outbreak?
This was a targeted inspection of infection prevention and control measures only; the service was inspected but not rated and the report does not assess the other care quality areas. This explanation was written from the published report of 2 September 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, February 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found kind, personalised care and clear improvements, but some medicine follow-up and care records needed strengthening.
This was an unannounced planned inspection because the previous rating was Requires Improvement. Inspectors visited on 08 January 2020 and 13 January 2020. They spoke with people, a relative, staff and healthcare professionals, and checked care, medicine, recruitment and management records.
The home was rated Good overall and Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People and relatives gave positive feedback. Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness and respect, and found that staff knew people's needs well.
The report says the home had improved since the previous inspection in November 2018. The earlier breach had been addressed, and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.
Inspectors still found some issues to improve. Medicine ordering follow-up and communication between managers and senior staff were not always strong. Some best-interest decisions and end-of-life wishes were not fully recorded, although action was taken on some records during the inspection.
Kind and respectful care
People and relatives spoke positively about the staff. Inspectors observed kind, respectful communication and support that was adapted to people's needs.
“People and their relatives we spoke with, all gave us positive feedback about the home and told us that staff were kind and caring.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans included people's preferences, life histories and communication needs. Staff were able to explain how they supported individuals and promoted independence.
“People's likes, dislikes and preferences were recorded in person-centred care plans that were reviewed with people and their relatives monthly” from the report
Activities and social life
Two activities coordinators provided individual and group activities throughout the week. Inspectors found these helped people maintain social wellbeing and take part in interests that mattered to them.
“The provider employed two activities co-ordinators who provided meaningful activities and events, seven days a week.” from the report
Improved management
The home had improved since the previous inspection. Managers used audits, incident reviews and feedback to monitor the service and make changes.
“At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.” from the report
Medicine ordering follow-up
needs fixingThe home did not always have robust communication for following up medicines that had been ordered. Inspectors found no evidence that anyone had been affected, and management acted during the inspection.
“communication systems used to follow up on medicines that had been ordered, were not always robust.” from the report
Future wishes records
needs fixingSome people's records contained limited information about their wishes for the end of life. Inspectors discussed developing these records further with the manager.
“However, for other people there was limited information within their 'future wishes' care plans.” from the report
Management communication
minorCommunication between managers and senior staff did not always ensure that identified actions were completed promptly. The management team took immediate action to improve information sharing and oversight.
“some communication systems between the management team and senior staff could be improved to ensure actions identified were completed in a timely way.” from the report
- 01How are medicine orders now tracked from ordering through to delivery, and who checks that follow-up is completed?
- 02How do you record each person's future wishes and end-of-life preferences, including cultural or religious choices?
- 03What changes were made to communication between managers and senior staff, and how do you check that actions are completed on time?
- 04How are care plans reviewed with residents and relatives, and how are changes in preferences recorded?
- 05How would you support someone who needs help to communicate choices or take part in activities?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five key questions, including both the premises and the care provided; all five ratings were given as Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 8 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.
Every inspection of Kite Hill Care Home
3 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- September 2020Inspected but not ratedcurrent ratingSafe: Inspected but not rated
- February 2020Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2018Requires improvementdown from GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- April 2016GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- January 2014
Report published without a new overall rating.
- May 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- January 2012
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- November 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 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
84 live-in carers within about two hours of Isle of Wight
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 £1,010 to £1,230 a week. 68 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“I cannot recommend Prisca highly enough, she is one in a million.”
“He stayed with her throughout the pandemic, refusing to visit his own family, who lived nearby, to reduce the risk of infection.”
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.