You are here

Priory Paddocks Nursing Home Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 13 November 2018

Priory Paddocks Nursing Home is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Priory Paddocks Nursing Home is registered to provide personal and nursing care to a maximum of 40 older people. At the time of the inspection there were 38 people using the service.

At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and there was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

Since the previous inspection the providers had employed a manager to assist them in the running of the service. However, at the time of the inspection one of the providers remained the registered manager. 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.

The service continued to protect people from the risks of abuse or avoidable harm and risks to people were identified and planned for. Where incidents occurred or poor staff practice was identified, action was taken to protect people from harm. Medicines were managed and administered safely and the premises remained clean. There were processes in place to reduce the risk of the spread of infection.

The service continued to ensure that there were enough staff to meet people’s physical, social and emotional needs in a timely way and that recruitment procedures were safe.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service continued to support this practice.

The service provided people with a choice of appropriate food and drink. Support people required to maintain good nutrition and hydration was reflected in care planning and staff were aware of the support people required. Some improvements could be made to how the meal service is organised and coordinated by staff.

People received care from staff who had the training, skills and experience for their role. The service continued to reward staff for completing mandatory training and to encourage the development of the staff team.

People told us staff were kind to them and the service continued to promote a culture of kindness, with the providers and all staff leading this practice.

The service continued to offer people personalised care based on their individual preferences and to involve people and their representatives in the planning of care. People were supported to have contact with other health professionals where appropriate.

People were provided with adequate sources of meaningful engagement and were supported to feedback their views and experiences through meetings and surveys. Changes were made to the service according to the feedback received. People were made aware of how they could complain and the service had an appropriate complaints policy and procedure in place.

The providers and staff had an understanding of the Gold Standards Framework for end of life care and had a process in place for supporting people coming to the end of their life. The provider and manager told us they were in the process of developing more detailed end of life care planning.

The provider and manager continued to operate an effective system to monitor the quality of the service provided to people. Areas for improvement were identified and acted upon. The service continued to work

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 13 November 2018

The service remains good.

Effective

Good

Updated 13 November 2018

The service remains good.

Caring

Good

Updated 13 November 2018

The service remains good.

Responsive

Good

Updated 13 November 2018

The service remains good.

Well-led

Good

Updated 13 November 2018

The service remains good.