Archived: Precious Care Home

Is the service responsive?

Is the service well-led

This is a summary of what we found;

Is the service responsive?

The service was responsive to people's needs and took appropriate actions. People said they were 'quite satisfied' with the care and support they were receiving. A person told us they would talk to the staff if they were unhappy about anything. Staff were aware of the complaints procedure and were clear about actions they would take and would try and resolve any concerns raised. A staff member said, 'some things you can sort out at the time'. Staff said they would always report any concerns or complaints to the manager and provider. They were confident appropriate actions would be taken as required to safeguard people.

Is the service well-led?

The provider had developed and reviewed the complaints management process since the last inspection. A record of complaints was in place which included a complaints log and a copy of the responses sent following complaints investigations. The complaints procedure was displayed in the corridor and accessible to people using the service.

Is the service safe?

Is the service effective?

Is the service caring?

Is the service responsive?

Is the service well-led

This is a summary of what we found.

Is the service safe?

Staff told us they had adequate time to provide care and they received training and updates to maintain their skills. There were clear processes that staff followed with regards to managing people's medicines. People told us they felt 'very safe' and the staff were 'very good'. When we spoke with staff it was clear they were knowledgeable about people's needs and were able to meet them.

We found the service had systems in place to ensure people were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff had completed training in safeguarding vulnerable adults as part of their induction. There was system in place in supporting the staff in raising any concerns. Staff were confident in reporting any concerns and felt this would be dealt with. The home was clean and staff followed their procedure for the control of infection.

CQC is required by law to monitor the operation of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) and to report on what we find. A senior staff told us they did not have anyone subject to this safeguard who was currently living at the home. Staff were aware of people's rights to make choices and people supported to be involved in their care.

Is the service effective?

The service was effective, care plans included risk assessments were completed to demonstrate how people's assessed needs would be met. People we spoke with were complimentary about the care and support they received. Support plans showed people's needs were assessed and clear information was provided for the staff. This included appropriate support with food and fluids to meet people's nutritional needs. Equipment was in place to support people and to maintain their independence.

Is the service caring?

We noted people were supported in a caring and compassionate way. Staff and people using the service had developed good relationships and people were treated with respect. One person told us staff were 'marvellous' and another told us 'I have good care'.

Is the service responsive?

The service was responsive because people told us told us they were satisfied with the care and support they were receiving. We saw people were supported to access external healthcare facilities as needed. The staff carried out regular reviews of people's care plans and action was taken to address any changes in their needs.

Is the service well-led?

Systems were in place to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service provided. Risks were assessed and appropriate action plans were in place. There were processes in place to review and learn from incidents and accidents. People's views were sought through satisfaction surveys and action plan developed to address any issues as needed.

There was a complaints process and information was available to people. Those acting on service users' behalf were not always confident in raising their concerns. We have asked the provider to tell us what they are going to do to meet the requirements of the law in relation to complaints management.

People described how staff provided the care and support that they expected and that they had agreed to. One person said 'the staff are excellent here, I wouldn't want to live anywhere else'. Another said 'the staff are lovely and would do anything for us'. People said the food was 'good and they could have an alternative if they wished'. Before people received any care or treatment they were asked for their consent and the provider acted in accordance with their wishes.

Their needs were assessed and the care plans staff followed reflected the assessed needs. They were protected from the risk of infection because appropriate guidance had been followed.

People were cared for, or supported by, suitably qualified, skilled and experienced staff. Appropriate checks were carried out by the provider to ensure people were of suitable character and fit to work in the service.

The provider had an effective system in place to identify, assess and manage risks to the health, safety and welfare of people who use the service and others.

Peoples' needs were assessed and care and treatment was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. People described how staff provided the care and support that they expected and that they had agreed to. Staff had been provided with sufficient information to ensure that people's preferences were respected. Staff received support and training that assisted them in understanding and meeting the needs of the people who used the service.