All inspections: Charlton Kings Care Home

Charlton Kings care home is owned by Charlton Care Limited. It is situated in the town of Cheltenham and offers accommodation for up to 36 older men and women. The service is a care home without nursing and provides accommodation for people who require personal care. There were 24 people who used the service at the time of the inspection. The previous inspections of April 2013 show the standards were not met. These standards included; consent to care and treatment, cleanliness and infection control, supporting workers and records. A follow up inspections which took place in July and September 2013 showed the standards were met.

The registered and deputy manager were present at the time of the inspection. They will be referred throughout this report as the management team. There was a registered manager in post at the service. A registered manager is a person who has been registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People told us if there were any concerns they could speak to the care staff and the registered manager who were always available. People’s concerns were promptly actioned which were used as an opportunity to enhance the provision of care. People spoke positively about the service and were encouraged to provide feedback about the care they received. People had access to a range of activities which prevented social isolation and promoted an active life where people could enjoy their time at Charlton Kings care home.

The service had a good management and leadership team. Relatives were involved in their family members care and the enthusiasm of the care staff was observed throughout our inspection visits. People’s care and welfare needs were regularly monitored with the assistance of the local GP and the multi professional agencies. The provider had robust systems in place to assess and monitor the quality of the service to ensure people received consistent standards of care which enhanced people’s quality of life.

Staff told us there was an open culture and the environment was an enjoyable place to work. People felt management had their best interests at heart and they were integral to the process of providing effective care to people. Family members and friends said the management was approachable and transparent. Staff said management was supportive and open to their development of skill and knowledge. For example, there was regular training for staff to enhance their competence in their caring role.

During this inspection we spoke with people who used the service, observed some of the support being given, spoke with staff and inspected relevant records. One person said 'It's lovely here though, you can do what you like. Go to bed when you like, get up when you like. Just like being at home".

We found found the service protected people who lacked mental capacity by making sure legal requirements under the Mental Capacity Act 2008 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards were met. People who did have capacity to make decisions about their care and treatment were involved in these.

There were arrangements in place to ensure people lived in a clean and hygienic environment. Cleaning schedules were used to organise cleaning tasks. Cleaning that had been completed was checked to see if it had been carried out to an acceptable standard. One person said "It's all done lovely. They even get right down and dust the skirting board. My bathroom is always clean". People were protected against care associated infection because there were good through infection control systems in place. A robust auditing process also made sure these standards were maintained and shortfalls were identified and resolved.

Staff received training that was relevant to their roles. Their were arrangements in place to ensure they received adequate supervision and professional development. Staff competencies were assessed on a regular basis.

The inspection was carried out to specifically follow up actions taken by the provider to improve record keeping in relation to people's care records. We did not speak with people about how their care records were maintained during this inspection. Instead we spoke with staff about the improvements they had made to how people's care records were completed and maintained. We also spoke with them about the systems, now in place, to help ensure these improvements were sustained. We inspected, in full, the care records of three people and also inspected the audits that had been carried out on seven people's care files.

We spoke to six people who used the service, three visitors and nine staff. We spoke to the management team. One person who used the service said of the staff "they are very helpful". Another person wished staff "would make the effort" to return to them with an answer when they had asked a question. This person went onto say "I like living here". One relative told us they were happy with the care being provided and another said "they have been fantastic". We looked at questionnaires completed by people who used the service and their relatives and all 23 contained predominantly positive comments. Staff lacked knowledge in the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which potentially puts people who lack mental capacity at risk of not being correctly protected. Staff had varying degrees of skill when it came to supporting people to eat and drink. Some practices observed were good and some were poor. Meals were pre prepared by an external company and we were told that these arrangements had improved people's food choices and ensured they received the food they required to meet their needs. The environment was clean and odour free but there were no systems in place to assess and monitor whether the current arrangements were effective and protected people against infection. Staff lacked appropriate training to meet some people's needs.There were shortfalls in how people's care records had been maintained and their security.

In order to get people's views of the service we asked four people what it was like living at Charlton Kings Care Home.

Only two were able to give a clear view of the service. One person said

"Staff always consult me regarding what support I require"

"Staff know what my care needs are and how and when I wish to receive support"

"Staff respect my wishes to have meals when I want them".

Another said, "The staff are are lovely, kind and always ask me if I'm comfortable" and "They are excellent with my husband and understand his healthcare needs".

We also read all of the satisfaction questionnaires received back by the service in February of this year, from people who use it.

These are a selection of many positive comments read.

'I am very happy and I have told my daughter, as she was worried about changing from where I was. I like the friendliness of the staff'.

'I was impressed when I first came here and I remian impressed'.

'I know I can join in activities if I want'.

'I feel secure here'.

One comment referred to wanting a different tea menu and we were told that the new cook plans to alter the tea menu.

People we spoke to told us that they like living at the home and told us they felt well looked after.

One visitor considered their relative to be well cared for and they told us they had no complaints about the service or care being provided.

Archived: Charlton Kings Care Home

All Inspections

To Be Confirmed

During a routine inspection

23 September 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

10 July 2013

During an inspection looking at part of the service

23, 24 April 2013

During a routine inspection

24 May 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

1 December 2011

During a routine inspection