Archived: Primley Court

Updated 12 August 2022

The inspection

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Health and Social Care Act 2008.

As part of this inspection we looked at the infection control and prevention measures in place. This was conducted so we can understand the preparedness of the service in preventing or managing an infection outbreak, and to identify good practice we can share with other services.

Inspection team

The inspection was carried out by three inspectors, an assistant inspector, a specialist advisor who was a nurse and an Expert by Experience who had consent to phone and gain feedback on the care provided by the service from people's relatives. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Service and service type

Primley Court is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing and personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement dependent on their registration with us. Primley Court is a care home with nursing care. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection.

Registered Manager

This service is required to have a registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

At the time of our inspection there was a registered manager in post.

Notice of inspection

This inspection was unannounced.

What we did before the inspection

Before the inspection we reviewed the information, we held about the service, including notifications we had received. Notifications are events, incidents or events the provider is legally required to tell us about. We also used the information the provider sent us in the provider information return (PIR). This is information providers are required to send us annually with key information about their service, what they do well, and improvements they plan to make. This information helps support our inspections.

During the inspection

We spent time with people and spoke with two people living at the service. We also spoke with 17 relatives, 10 staff, the director of compliance, deputy manager and the registered manager. We also spoke with three health and social care professionals. To help us assess and understand how the service met and supported people’s care needs, we looked at five care records and reviewed records relating to the running and management of the service. These included staff recruitment and training records, medicine records and records in relation to the providers quality assurance processes. We also used the Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). SOFI is a way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who could not talk with us.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

Updated 12 August 2022

About the service

Primley Court is a large service located over two sites, providing nursing care for up to 80 people. Primley Court (New Wing and Old Wing) can accommodate and provide nursing and personal care for up to 51 people. A neighbouring building called The View is also part of Primley Court. This building is further up the road, it is not attached to Primley Court and provides nursing care for up to 29 people. There were 44 people living at Primley Court and 25 people living at The View at the time of the inspection.

The service provides care for older people, many who have complex health needs and are living with dementia or a cognitive impairment. Some people required a high level of staff supervision (one to one care) and support to promote their independence and safety.

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

People received care and support specific to their individual needs, choices and preferences. Staff were skilled and knowledgeable about people’s physical and mental health needs and were aware of people’s life histories and things that were important to them.

People’s risks were known and well managed and there were sufficient numbers of experienced staff available to meet people’s needs. People received their medicines as prescribed although, improvement was required in relation to recordings.

Staff were able to explain people’s individual needs and how they should be met. Care records were in the process of being transferred across to an electronic system and information was being updated to reflect people’s current needs.

People were cared for by staff who treated them with dignity, respect and compassion. Staff were exceptionally kind and caring ensuring people’s emotional needs were met which enhanced people’s well-being.

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.

The service was led by a registered manager who was passionate and committed to their role and who empowered their team to continually improve the quality of care people received. The registered manager was an integral part of different initiatives to improve and develop care practice.

Significant investment in developing and training staff had resulted in good outcomes for people, particularly those who were living with dementia. People had access to a wide range of different activities which were person-centred and held either in groups or individually.

The premises were undergoing refurbishment and consideration had been given to people’s varying needs. The service had created an environment that supported people living with complex health conditions or people living with dementia or behaviours that may at times challenge.

The service was well-managed. There was a culture of continued learning, development and improvement in order to achieve good outcomes for people. Everyone felt supported by the management team and the registered manager had a good oversight of the service. The provider had systems in place to monitor and continually improve the service. The Registered manager and staff team worked collaboratively with external agencies to continually improve care practice and delivery. Clear communication processes were in place and good practice was shared.

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 21 August 2018).

Why we inspected

We undertook this inspection as part of a random selection of services which have had a recent Direct Monitoring Approach (DMA) assessment where no further action was needed to seek assurance about this decision and to identify learning about the DMA process.

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.

You can read the report from our last comprehensive inspection, by selecting the ‘all reports’ link for Primley Court on our website at www.cqc.org.uk.

Follow up

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