Kensington Home Care

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

People experienced good health and wellbeing outcomes because their needs were assessed from the outset. Their care, support and treatment reflected these needs and had regard to any protected equality characteristics. The service work well with people, who were at the centre of their care package. The registered manager led an office team who wanted to continually improve the service and be mindful of best practice. Consent was factored in to care planning but people’s experience of their consent being sought was mixed.

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 generally positive about how well staff helped them achieve good health and wellbeing outcomes. They described staff regularly checking with them to ensure there was a shared understanding of what they were doing and, aside from a small number of specific concerns raised, people felt staff did understand and act on their needs well.

The registered manager worked well with the visiting officer, who conducted the majority of visits to people, and demonstrated a comprehensive knowledge of people’s needs. Staff has access to a comprehensive level of information about people’s needs. External partners shared positive feedback about how the service assessed people’s needs, and understood what those needs meant for people. One said, “Care staff have specifically provided vital information regarding continence products to nursing staff, flagged skin integrity issues and general health decline to family members to contact GP’s.”

The initial visit from the visiting officer and the 6 monthly quality review were effective ways of meaningfully and comprehensively assessing people’s needs.

People confirmed staff delivered the care they needed and linked in with other health and social care professionals when their needs changed.

Staff were confident in accessing the information they needed and demonstrated an understanding of people’s needs.

The provider used an electronic records system to document care needs and daily interactions with people. Records we viewed were comprehensive in terms of initial care planning. Daily notes needed more work to ensure they were meaningful, consistent and person-centred. The registered manager was aware of this and had plans in place to improve consistency in this area.

The majority of people received short calls to help with aspects of personal care, so there was little moving between services. People stated they often received a rota but the staff on the rota were not always the ones who arrived. We fed this back to the registered manager, who recognised they needed to improve the continuity of care people received.

Staff confirmed they were kept up to date by the registered manager and had the confidence to work with external professionals when needed. They had ready access to contact numbers for relevant healthcare professionals if they were needed.

External partners gave positive feedback about how the staff team communicated with each other, and with externa; professionals, to help achieve a shared goal. One said, “It has been my experience that all the staff that I have worked alongside or communicated with have been proactive in resolving issues and extremely professional both when dealing with myself and service users.” Another said, “The registered manager always had in depth knowledge of the clients, ensured information was disseminated down to carers and ensure appropriately trained.”

There were clear lines of communication between office staff and external professionals, with whom the service worked well. This helped the planning for any new care packages and that people’s needs could be met collaboratively.

People consistently told us that staff were unable to meet their nutritional needs, through a lack of awareness and understanding of how to prepare some basic meal options. The registered manager knew of isolated issues and took action when we shared wider feedback about the extent of the problem. They committed to reviewing how they inducted staff into people’s preferred meal options, and to ensuring staff had the competence to make such meals.

Staff supported people to have choice in their day to day lives when supporting them (aside from the meal preparation issues, discussed above). They gave choices and supported people to maintain aspects of their independence, such as tasks around the house and aspects of personal care.

Care plans and records did contain a comprehensive level of information. Formal training and induction processes were in place but they had not always ensured staff were equipped with the skills required to meet people’s nutritional needs. The registered manager recognised induction and staff oversight processes needed to improve in this regard. Thet made improvements during the assessment including trialling new guidance for staff with limited awareness of people's food preferences.

People were satisfied in the outcomes they experienced, namely receiving their medicines on time and getting the support they needed to remain independent.

Staff were able to access and update the electronic care records system promptly. Office staff understood it’s functionality well, and were able to access the information they needed. When external professionals contacted the service, they found information about people easy to access and follow, and helpful in order to meet people’s wider needs. One external professional told us, “I am aware of occasions when care staff have highlighted presentation changes in clients or addressed need for additional medical help intervention to ensure the needs of the client are met.”

The provider’s electronic records system allowed for real time access to people’s records and for the simplification of some tasks for care staff.

People felt staff were respectful of their needs and choices, but often forgot to check for consent at each and every visit, for instance when delivering personal care. We shared this feedback with the registered manager, who reminded staff of the need for this. People we spoke with did not raise any concerns about anything being done against their will, but could not recall staff checking in with them at each and every personal care interaction, to ensure they consented.

The registered manager and visiting officer demonstrated a sound understanding of the principles of the Mental Capacity Act and how to support people to make their own decisions. They worked with people, families and partners to help people make informed choices and advocate for them when necessary. Staff had received training in the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and respected people’s right to choose. Care planning reflected this and helped enable people to make their own decisions. Staff liaised with those who knew people best to help them make some complex decisions. One external professional told us, “I have worked with [registered manager] very closely recently where as a provider and commissioner both where required to advocate for a individual client, therefore I feel that as a provider they actively advocate for individuals and ensure their health needs are met.”

The MCA policy was up to date and informed by current good practice. Mandatory training included training around consent and capacity.