Keneydon House

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Systems and processes were in place to ensure people’s needs were assessed. People and the relatives we spoke with told us that they had visited the service before they moved in and were involved in the discussion about the care needs that would be required. Staff knew people well and delivered care in line with their needs, however improvements were required to the documentation and review of this.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People were happy with the care that was provided. All the people we spoke with were not interested in seeing copies of the care plans.

Staff knew how to access care records and ensured they referred to healthcare professionals when needed. Whilst people’s preferences were understood by staff. Some staff told us they needed to encourage people not to be in their room all day and spend time in the lounge area to ensure they did not become socially isolated . We saw this was reflected in people's care plans and in the attitude and care of people by staff.

There were systems and processes in place to assess people’s needs before they moved into the home, and for reviews to continue whilst a person lived at the home.

People told us their health needs were met and they referred to health professionals such as GPs in a timely way. One person said, “The doctor came here to see me and I get my medication when I need it.” A family member commented that they have had to sort out dental care for their loved one. “Staff help keep their teeth clean.”

Staff confirmed that the GP visits the people in the service and if they noted somebody was unwell they would phone the GP.

There were processes in place for contacting health professionals. People’s wellbeing and health were reviewed regularly. This included monthly clinical observations and weights. Staff were vigilant and when people became unwell they contacted the GP and made a record of this in the daily notes for the person. People's health needs were well managed. People’s nutritional and dietary needs were met. Management shared ongoing issues with the GP support for the service. This information was reflected in peoples care notes that we looked at.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

People told us that staff support them with their healthcare needs. One relative said “[Family member] sees the Nurse and the GP and we are provided with up-to-date information following the visit from the GP.”

The manager told us they received a good service from the local GP surgery and community nurses.

People’s weights were being monitored and referrals made to the dietician if people had lost weight. There was a process for sharing information if people were admitted to hospital.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

People we spoke with, and their relatives felt they were always asked about the care and support needs. One person said, “Staff are lovely, always respectful and will ask me if there's anything else I need before they leave.” A relative said, “Staff do phone regularly to keep me updated on [Family member].”

The manager demonstrated a good understanding of Mental Capacity Assessments (MCA) and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). Staff told us they were aware of who had a DoLS in place.

Processes were in place to assess and monitor people’s capacity in relation to consent. Where necessary, people had deprivation of liberty safeguards (DoLS) in place, which were monitored by the manager.