Kings Court

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

We assessed 6 quality statements in the effective key question and found areas of good practice. Peoples needs and rights were supported. Peoples care and treatment was effective due to their health, care, well-being, and communication needs being assessed with them. Peoples care plans are kept up to date with any assessments completed in a timely manner. Staff were aware people’s preferences and respected these in a person-centred way. People were aware of their rights around care and treatment. Staff had good knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act (2005), including capacity and consent.

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 told us that they were involved with planning their care. People were confident that their needs were understood by the staff team. Relatives also told us that staff understood their loved one’s needs and how best to support them. One relative said, “Our loved one came for respite and settled so well, they stayed and that was almost a year ago.”

Staff told us that they had time to review care planning documents, meaning they could keep up to date with people’s changing needs. Staff had good knowledge of how to support people’s needs and what action to take if the person’s needs appeared to have changed.

Care plans demonstrated, that where required, a range of national assessment tools were used to understand people's needs and how best to support them. For example, we found people’s needs and preferences were assessed, and care and support were delivered in line with current standards. Pre-admission assessments included information around people’s healthcare needs, preferred communication methods and how to best support people. People’s communication needs were recorded and understood by staff. This enabled staff to have a clear understanding of the person’s needs. Staff had access to documents on how to support people. Where people’s needs changed, these care planning documents were updated so staff understood people’s current needs.

People told us they have everything they want, and the food is excellent. One person told us. “The food is always good and there are so many snacks and treats offered. I sometimes feel like a kid in a sweet shop.” We observed that lunchtime appeared to be calm with people having assistance with hand cleanliness. They were offered a glass of wine and a choice of food. All available staff were present to assist with this so that food was served hot and in a timely manner.

Kitchen staff were knowledgeable regarding people’s nutrition needs and ensured people’s meals were person centred to their individual preferences and needs. Staff understood how to work with external health and social care providers to provide support in the most effective way.

People had enough to eat and drink to maintain their health and wellbeing. Effective processes were in place to make sure people’s views and preferences were sought and acknowledged in relation to their care. People’s needs, views and preferences were clearly reflected in their care plans. People’s nutrition and hydration needs were supported in line with current standards. The cook would visit all new residents to find out people’s nutrition and hydration needs. They would find out people’s like, dislikes and preferences to ensure people had a quality dining experience.

People and relatives spoke positively about the staff team. One person told us, “They [staff] are brilliant, without exception.” People told us their experiences good quality care from the staff team.

Management told us they worked well with other health professionals and obtain any health advice when needed and ensured it was followed. Deputy manager was able to explain when the district nurse would attend and the reason for the visits. We observed good communication between professionals.

We have not received any feedback from partners regarding this quality statement. However, the provider shared an email that was sent to them from the primary community services which praised the home for their exceptional organisation skills during their visit to deliver flu and covid vaccination at the home. They said, “your meticulous planning, provision of space, and assigning a dedicated team member truly streamlined the process. Your team’s efficiency played a crucial role in minimising any potential disruption to the home.”

There were effective processes and systems in place to allow staff, teams, and service to work together. We found care plans include all the information and guidance to deliver people’s care and support appropriately.

People told us they were supported to live a healthy independent life and if they needed support they could get support. We saw people looked well cared for and happy. People and relatives told us they had no concerns, and the home would contact a health professional if needed.

The provider had an activities staff member who was employed to plan and provide people with meaningful activities to ensure their hobbies and interests were maintained.

People’s needs were assessed to identify any concerns regarding their health and well-being. Staff knew people well and could explain how they supported people to live a healthy life and provide meaningful activities to help people’s well-being.

People were provided with opportunities to speak up about their care and support to ensure it was meeting their needs. People were part of their care planning to provide information to staff regarding their outcomes. People and relatives were positive about the care that was provided.

The management told us they routinely checked people were satisfied with the service. People had a social committee meeting monthly where they could get people’s preferences and opinions on upcoming and past events/activities in and out of the home.

There was a process in place called resident of the day, this was when peoples care, and support needs were reviewed. The person was given an opportunity to discuss what was working and what needed to be improved. People felt their feedback was taken into account.

People were supported to understand their rights. People were provided with opportunities to discuss their views and wishes. People told us they felt they were included with decision making regarding their care and support.

Staff told us they most of the people living at the service made their own decisions because they had capacity. Where people did not have capacity, they supported people in their best interest.

The Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) provides a legal framework for making decisions on behalf of people who may lack the mental capacity to do so for themselves. The Act requires that, as far as possible, people make their own decisions and are helped to do so when needed. When they lack mental capacity to make decisions, any made on their behalf must be in their best interests and as least restrictive as possible. Care plans demonstrated that the Mental Capacity Act had been followed, and where necessary, a mental capacity assessment had been completed. Staff had received training around the Mental Capacity Act 2005.