Priestley Rose Nursing Home

Priestley Rose Nursing Home is a care home providing personal and nursing care to up to 47 people. The service provides support to adults of all ages, some of whom may have dementia or physical disabilities. At the time of our inspection there were 37 people using the service.

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

People were protected from the risk of harm through effective systems which assessed, monitored and mitigated risks to people’s health, safety and welfare. People were supported by an established staff team, who knew people’s needs well. People received their medicines safely and were cared for in an environment where the risk of infection was managed through regular cleaning and good hygiene practices.

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.

Quality assurance systems were effective for people, which meant people received consistent, good quality and safe care. People, relatives and staff spoke positively about the management of the service and systems were in place to seek people’s feedback and drive continuous improvements.

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 19 October 2019).

Why we inspected

The inspection was prompted in part by notification of an incident following which a person using the service died. This incident is subject to further investigation by CQC as to whether any regulatory action should be taken. As a result, this inspection did not examine the circumstances of the incident. However, the information shared with CQC about the incident indicated potential concerns about the management of healthcare emergencies. This inspection examined those risks. We found no evidence during this inspection that people were at risk of harm from this concern. Please see the safe and well-led sections of this full report.

We looked at infection prevention and control measures under the Safe key question. We look at this in all care home inspections even if no concerns or risks have been identified. This is to provide assurance that the service can respond to COVID-19 and other infection outbreaks effectively.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.

Priestley Rose Nursing Home is a residential care home providing personal and nursing care to 42 people aged 65 and over at the time of the inspection. The service can support up to 47 people.

People were supported by staff who understood the appropriate action to take should they be concerned about their safety. The risks associated with people’s care had been identified and plans put in place to minimise these. Staff had been recruited safely and there were tools in place to ensure appropriate staffing levels were in place. People were supported to take their medicines safely.

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. Staff received training appropriate to their role.

People received support that was caring, compassionate and kind. People and their relatives were involved in all aspects of their care. People had their dignity and privacy respected and their independence promoted.

People were supported to take part in social activities. People were able to raise concerns and complaints and be assured these would be investigated.

The service was not always well managed. Audits undertaken had failed to identify that improvement was needed to some records, for example the process followed regarding sharing of bedrooms and details in some risk assessments. People and staff were able to feedback their views of the service and had opportunities to suggest improvements. Plans were in place to introduce electronic care records to help improve the standard of record keeping and monitoring that people received care in line with their assessed needs.

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 22 March 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.

Priestley Rose Nursing Home is a privately owned care home situated in a residential area of Birmingham. Nursing care is provided for up to 47 older people who live at the home. There were 41 people living there at the time of our inspection.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People received a safe service, because the provider had procedures in place to reduce the risks of harm to people. Staff were trained to help keep people safe and knew the procedures for ensuring people did not suffer abuse or harm.

People received their medicines as prescribed and were cared for in an environment that was well maintained to ensure they were safe.

People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff that were suitably recruited, trained, supervised, supported and monitored to ensure they cared for people effectively.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

People had a choice of meals and were supported to eat and drink enough to maintain their health and well-being. Staff knew how to support people that may be at risk of not eating or drinking sufficient to maintain their health. People had access to health care professionals when they were unwell, so their health care needs were met.

People and their relatives were happy with the care they received and felt that staff were caring and compassionate towards them. People’s privacy and dignity was maintained and staff encouraged people to be as independent as possible.

Visitors were welcomed in the home, so that people could maintain relationships with people that were important to them. Social activities were provided for people who wished to take part.

People and their relatives were involved in planning and agreeing their care needs, so they knew what care was being provided. Where people had concerns about their care, there were effective procedures in place to handle these concerns. People were confident that any concerns they raised would be acted on and resolved to their satisfaction.

People received a service that was well managed, by a stable management team and there were systems in place to ensure the care people received was monitored. People knew who the registered manager was and felt that she was open and visible in the home. This gave people confidence in the service. People had the opportunity to comment on the quality of the service they received.

Priestley Rose Nursing Home provides a service for up to 47 people. People living at this home may have a range of different nursing care needs. A registered nurse is available at all times. There were 41 people living there at the time of our inspection.

There was a registered manager in post at the time of our inspection. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We previously inspected this service on 1 and 3 December 2015, at that inspection people told us they felt safe. During this inspection we found that although procedures were in place to assess and monitor the risks to people, they were not sufficiently effective to ensure people were safe at all times. Therefore appropriate actions were not always taken to reduce the risk of harm happening to people. Specific concerns were identified in regards to unguarded radiators and pipe works, which had the potential to put people at risk of harm.

You can see what action we told the provider to take at the back of the full version of the report.

On the day of our inspection we talked with the manager and the director and looked in detail at the care records for four people. We observed how people were being cared for in the home and sat with five people in the lounge area. We talked with two people who lived there. We visited on a weekday and we spoke with five relatives. We talked with three staff members and looked at four staff files. There were 42 people who lived at the home when we visited.

Below is a summary of what we found. The summary describes the records we looked at and what people using the service and staff told us.

If you want to see the evidence that supports our summary, please read the full report.

Is the service safe?

There were procedures in place to safeguard people from abuse. Staff understood their role in safeguarding the people they supported. The staff and manager had a good understanding of whistle blowing policy. This meant people were kept safe.

We saw people were cared for in an environment that was safe and clean. One relative told us, 'My mom is clean and she's well.'

Risk assessments and health and safety measures were in place to keep people safe. The Care Quality Commission monitors the operation of the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards which applies to care homes. The manager had an understanding of these safeguards which ensure people's rights and choices are protected.

Is the service effective?

People received the care and support they required to meet their needs and maintain their health and welfare. People's care and support had been reviewed and care plans updated. Staff had been provided with up to date training in a range of topics including safeguarding people from abuse. Care plans were linked to people's individual needs, for example, in relation to nutrition and mobility. Staff had a good understanding of people's care and support needs and knew them well. The service worked well with other agencies and services to make sure people received their care safely and effectively. A member of staff told us, 'It's nice here everyone cooperates.'

Is the service caring?

All staff were aware of peoples choices and support needs. We saw the staff and manager were patient and gave encouragement when supporting people. All the staff we spoke with expressed kindness towards the people they supported. A staff member told us, 'I'd say that the care staff are very caring.'

Relatives told us staff were caring and respectful. Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities to respect people's privacy and dignity. We saw that staff were available to support people. One person told us, 'The girls are beautiful to me, they are very kind.'

Is the service responsive?

We spoke with the manager who told us she involved other professionals in people's care when their needs changed. This was so their care could continue to be provided safely and appropriately. Staff were aware that people's needs varied throughout the day and responded accordingly. People who lived at the home and their relatives were listened to and their views were acted upon. People were asked to give feedback on their experience of the service. People's feedback was then used to make improvements to the service.

Is the service well-led?

The manager was aware of their responsibilities in meeting the essential standards of quality and safety. Systems were in place for assessing and monitoring the quality of the service. Staff felt well supported and records we reviewed confirmed that staff were appropriately trained and supported to carry out their role safely. Staff told us they were clear about their roles and responsibilities. There was a clear structure of supervision responsibilities within the staff team. Staff felt supported to do a good job. A relative told us, 'We have an activities co-ordinator now. The barbeque last week was brilliant. They put things on like bingo and parties.'

People told us that staff talked to them about their care. We found that before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes.

All the people that lived at the home and relatives that we spoke with told us that their needs were being met. One person told us, “Yes I am being looked after very well.” We found that care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare.

All the people that we spoke with told us that they were treated well by the staff. However, we found that the recruitment process did not fully ensure that people were cared for by staff that were suitable recruited.

Everyone that we spoke with said they thought there was enough staff to care for them. We found that there were sufficient numbers of staff employed to meet people’s needs.

All of the people that we spoke with had no concerns about the quality of care that they received. One person told us, “I am really well cared for.” We found that the provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people receive.