Herondale Kingfisher

Updated 17 January 2020

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team

On the first day of the inspection the inspection team consisted of an inspection manager, an inspector, an assistant inspector and a specialist advisor who had experience in this type of setting. One inspector returned to complete the inspection on the second day.

Service and service type

Herondale Kingfisher is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

We reviewed information we had received about the service since the last inspection. We sought information from the local clinical commissioning group who work with this service. The provider was not asked to complete a provider information return prior to this inspection. This is information we require providers to send us to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We took this into account when we inspected the service and made the judgements in this report. We used all of this information to plan our inspection.

During the inspection

We spoke with eight people who used the service and six relatives about their experience of the care provided. We spoke with seventeen members of staff including the registered manager, deputy manager, area manager, care staff, nurses and the chef. We used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

We reviewed a range of records. This included ten peoples care records and seven medication records. We looked at two staff files in relation to recruitment and staff supervision. A variety of records relating to the management of the service were reviewed.

After the inspection

We continued to seek clarification from the provider to validate the evidence found.

Updated 17 January 2020

About the service

Herondale Kingfisher is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to 67 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 79 people.

The service is split over two buildings on the same site. Herondale provides nursing and residential care to people living with dementia and Kingfisher supports people primarily with nursing care needs.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People received safe care. People were supported by staff who understood the action to take should they have any concerns about people’s safety. The risks associated with people’s care had been identified and plans put in place to minimise these. Staff had been recruited safely. People were supported to take their medicines safely.

People received effective care. People received support to eat and drink meals of their choosing and where required were supported to access appropriate healthcare. Staff had received training in people’s needs. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People felt well supported and cared for by staff. People had been involved in developing a plan of care based on their preferences and were involved in making choices about their care. Staff enjoyed supporting people.

People received care that was responsive to their needs. People had been involved in reviewing their care to ensure it continued to meet their needs. People participated in activities of their choosing. People and relatives felt able to raise any concerns and could be assured these would be investigated.

The service was well led. Systems were in place to monitor the quality and safety of the service. People and staff were able to feedback their views of the service. The registered manager was aware of their responsibilities for notifying the commission of specific events.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection- The last rating for this service was Good (published 3 June 2017).

Why we inspected- This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up- We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.