CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at Kynaston Farm
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Requires improvement
- Fire safety was not always managed appropriately, and advice from the fire service had not been acted on promptly. Safeguarding, medicines, recruitment and staffing were otherwise found to be satisfactory.
- Effective?
- Good
- People received effective support from trained staff and had access to healthcare professionals. Mental capacity and best-interest records, and some weight-monitoring records, needed review.
- Caring?
- Good
- Inspectors found a kind atmosphere, with people treated as individuals and supported to express their views. Staff promoted dignity, privacy and independence.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Staff understood people's needs and responded to changes. People were supported with communication, relationships, activities and personal goals.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The provider had an open culture and used feedback and quality checks to improve the service. Staff worked as a team and shared a person-centred approach.
What inspectors found, August 2019
Rated Good overall; inspectors found kind, person-centred care, but fire safety needed improvement.
Two inspectors visited the home on 26 June 2019. They spoke with people, staff, relatives and healthcare professionals, and checked care, medicine, recruitment, training and management records.
The home was rated Good overall. Effective, caring, responsive and well-led were all rated Good. People were supported to make choices, build independence, try activities and access healthcare.
Safe was rated Requires Improvement. Fire safety records, staffing information and action following fire service advice were not always managed promptly. The inspectors made a recommendation, but did not state that a regulation had been breached.
Personalised support
People were involved in decisions about their lives and care. Staff supported them to develop skills, set goals and become more independent.
“The outcomes for people using the service reflected the principles and values of Registering the Right Support by promoting choice and control, independence and inclusion.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors found a warm, welcoming atmosphere. People were treated as individuals and their emotional needs were supported.
“There was a very caring, kind atmosphere within the service.” from the report
Good health support
Staff noticed changes in people's health and sought advice from healthcare professionals. Advice was followed appropriately.
“People's health needs were monitored closely. Staff were quick to identify any changes in these and seek advice.” from the report
Activities and independence
People could try new activities, build relationships and work towards personal goals. The home supported people to take part in household tasks and community activities.
“People had the opportunity to try new activities and develop their interests.” from the report
Involvement and openness
People, relatives and staff were invited to give feedback and help shape the home. House meetings were used to involve people in decisions.
“The provider had an open, inclusive culture where feedback was welcomed by people and staff.” from the report
Fire safety
seriousFire safety records, policies and staffing information did not always show that risks were being managed properly. Advice from the fire service to update the fire risk assessment had not been acted on promptly.
“Fire safety was not always managed well, which could put people at risk in the event of a fire.” from the report
Mental capacity records
needs fixingRecords did not show clearly how people's ability to make particular decisions had been considered or how best-interest decisions had been reached.
“Mental capacity assessments and best interest records were not recorded to show how people's ability to make decisions had been considered” from the report
Weight monitoring
needs fixingWhen people lost weight, records did not always show how this was monitored or whether further action was needed.
“When people had lost weight, it was not always clear how this was monitored or if any other action was needed.” from the report
- 01What changes have been made to the fire risk assessment and fire safety procedures since the inspection?
- 02How do you now check that fire safety records, staffing information and evacuation arrangements are up to date?
- 03How are mental capacity assessments and best-interest decisions recorded and reviewed?
- 04How do you monitor weight loss and decide when further action or healthcare advice is needed?
- 05What improvements have been made since Safe fell from Good at the 2016 inspection?
This was a planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including both the premises and the care provided. This explanation was written from the published report of 14 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, October 2016
Rated Good in every area; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care with strong involvement from residents.
The inspection was unannounced and took place on 10 August 2016. One inspector spoke with people living at the home, relatives, staff and a health professional. They also reviewed care, risk and medicine records, complaints information, accident forms and staff training records.
The home provided accommodation and personal care for six people with a learning disability or autistic spectrum disorder. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicine arrangements, suitable training and good support for people's health and nutrition.
Care was tailored to people's needs, preferences and goals. People were involved in decisions, daily household life and choosing some staff. The home was rated Good for Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led.
Personalised lives
People had individual care and support, including life stories and dream books. Staff helped people work towards their own interests and aspirations.
“People received care and support that was tailored to their individual needs and preferences.” from the report
Safety and medicines
Staff understood safeguarding and people's risks. Medicines were handled by trained staff who had regular competency checks, and records were accurate.
“People received support to take their medicine by trained staff who received regular competency assessments to ensure the safe management of medicines.” from the report
Communication and choice
The home used communication passports, pictures, visual prompts and other methods to help people express choices and take part in decisions.
“The provider's speech and language therapist team had developed communication passports with people to ensure effective communication.” from the report
Independence
Staff supported people to do as much as possible for themselves, make choices and take part in everyday activities and household life.
“Staff treated people with respect and promoted their independence.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01The report mentioned recent staff turnover. What is the current staffing situation, and how are new staff supported to learn my relative's needs?
- 02How would you update my relative's care plan and risk assessments when their needs, behaviour or preferred activities change?
- 03What communication methods would you use if my relative could not communicate choices verbally?
- 04If my relative has complex nutrition or health needs, how would you follow advice from speech and language therapists and other health professionals?
- 05How are people and relatives currently involved in care reviews, complaints and decisions about the running of the home?
This was an unannounced inspection of the overall service, including all five CQC questions, and the report records six people living at the home. This explanation was written from the published report of 18 October 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 Kynaston Farm
2 rated inspections over 3 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- August 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- October 2016GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- August 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 23 August 2013.
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
57 live-in carers within about an hour of Shropshire
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 £960 to £1,230 a week. 52 can care for a couple. 9 years' experience on average.
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.