Kenton Hall Nursing Home

Updated 12 June 2024

Kenton Hall Nursing Home is a care home providing personal and nursing care for up to 60 people, some of whom are living with dementia. At the time of the inspection there were 50 people living at the home. Bedrooms are situated on two floors with people having access to communal lounges, dining areas and a garden. We spoke to 9 people, 6 relatives and 3 visiting care professionals. We spoke to 10 staff members including the manager, deputy manager, clinical lead, nominated individual and care staff. We carried out our onsite inspection on 26 June and 4 July 2024. Inspection activity started on 26 June 2024 and ended on 10 July 2024. The inspection was unannounced. The inspection was prompted by concerns received relating to the culture, staffing and governance of the service. We found no major concerns relating to the culture or governance of the service. Staffing levels were not as good as they could be, but the provider was in the process of recruiting new staff. The last inspection of this service was rated Good (published 14 May 2021). At this inspection the service remained Good. The service had a positive person-centred culture, permanent staff knew people well. Medicines were managed safely. we identified some discrepancies in medicines record keeping which the manager rectified swiftly. Visiting professionals gave positive feedback about staff and the management. Lessons had been learned from accidents, incidents and safeguarding and were shared with staff. Care pathways, assessments and transitions were managed well. People felt safe at the service. Consent was sought when providing care, best interest decisions and mental capacity assessments were in place when needed. People’s independence was promoted whenever possible. Staff felt able to speak up, and said management listened and acted on their suggestions. There were robust governance systems in place to identify and address issues.

Updated 12 June 2024

We received mainly positive comments from people who lived at the service, relatives, staff and health care professionals. Negative comments related to staffing issues and the use of agency (non-permanent) staff who did not know people as well as permanent staff. One relative said, “The are different the permanent staff and agency staff. Some staff have been here a long time, with the agency it varies, there’s some in today. The agency staff don’t know the residents all that well. The permanent staff know them much better, it’s easier for them.” People said that staff cared for them safely. When people used specialist equipment staff supported them to use it safely. One person said, “Yes there’s no issues, they maintain [medical device].” People were happy with the management of the service and knew who to contact if they had any problems they wanted to raise. One person said, “I get along with the new manager very well. Better than the previous one. [Manager] listens he’s very attentive, he pops in we have a laugh and a bit carry on. I see him every other day. I would talk to [manager] definitely.” People said that staff promoted their independence and involved them or their families in decisions about their care. One relative said, “I do feel listened to when I discuss things, they do change things, they sort things out yes.” Another relative said, “I get a phone call if there’s any issues with the care. We went through the care plan and filled in some of the gaps. I signed it. They encourage [person’s] independence yes, they encourage her to get up from the chair and persuade her to have a shower.” Feedback about medicines was positive, people said they got their medicines on time. When asked whether they were treated with dignity and respect, one person said, “Yes [staff] don’t make you feel you are in a setting for ill people it’s so nice.”