Archived: Harry Priestley House

Updated 26 April 2017

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

The inspection took place on 16 February 2017 and was unannounced. The inspection was undertaken by an adult social care inspector.

Before the inspection, we reviewed the information we held about the home, which included incident notifications they had sent us. We also contacted the commissioners of the service at Doncaster Council.

We spoke with four people who used the service and observed the care and support people received in communal areas. We spoke with one person’s relative, who was visiting at the time of the inspection. We also contacted a specialist community nurse who had regular contact with the service.

We spoke with four members of the staff team including the registered manager. We reviewed a range of records about people’s care and how the home was managed. These included the care plans and day to day records for three people. We saw the systems used to manage people’s medication, including the storage and records kept. We looked at the quality assurance systems that were in place. We had a tour around the shared areas of the house and saw some people’s bedrooms.

Updated 26 April 2017

This inspection took place on 16 February 2017 and was unannounced. Our last inspection of this service took place in May 2015 when we rated the service as Good. At this inspection we found the service remained Good.

Harry Priestley House is in Thorne, near Doncaster. It is registered to provide accommodation for up to 12 people who require personal care. The home specialises in supporting adults with learning disabilities. At the time of our inspection there were 11 people living in the home.

The service had a registered manager in post. 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.

People who used the service said the staff were caring and they felt safe. Staff had a clear understanding of safeguarding people from abuse. Staff members raised safeguarding concerns appropriately and this showed that they put the safety and welfare of the people who used the service first.

Care and support was planned and delivered in a way that ensured people were safe. The individual risk assessments identified any risk associated with people’s care and had been devised to help minimise and monitor the risk, while encouraging people to be as independent as possible.

There were enough staff with the right skills, knowledge and experience to meet people’s needs. The staff training record showed that staff were provided with appropriate training to help them meet people’s needs.

The home was particularly well decorated and maintained. People were involved in choosing the way the house was decorated. The registered manager explained that as some people were developing dementia, they had taken advice from a specialist team on how to decorate parts of the home to help the people living with dementia connect with the world around them.

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 supported this practice. The service to be meeting the requirements of the Mental Capacity Act and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS).

People were supported to eat and drink sufficient to maintain a balanced diet and snacks were available in-between. People were supported to maintain good health and to have access to healthcare services. We looked at people’s records and found they had received support from healthcare professionals when required.

People’s needs were assessed and care and support was planned and delivered in line with their individual care plan. We saw staff were aware of people’s needs and the best ways to support them and encouraged people to maintain their independence.

People had their own copy of their colourful and very person centred plan.

People took part in many and varied activities in the home and in the community, and were supported to keep in contact with people who were important to them, such as their family and friends.

The service had a complaints procedure, which was available in an ‘easy read’ version to help people to understand how to raise any concerns they might have.

People were consulted about their experience of the service. Regular residents’ house meetings took place. The provider produced an easy read questionnaire for people who used the service and arranged for an independent advocate to help people to fill them in.

The registered manager and members of the staff team undertook quality and safety audits and there was an emphasis on learning from incidents and investigations and making sure the learning was shared in the team.

Staff meetings took place each month and staff were confident to discuss ideas and raise issues.