• Mental Health
  • Independent mental health service

Archived: The Priory Hospital St Neots

Overall: Good read more about inspection ratings

Howitts Lane, Eynesbury, St Neots, Cambridgeshire, PE19 2JA (01480) 210210

Provided and run by:
Priory Rehabilitation Services Limited

Important: The provider of this service changed. See new profile

Latest inspection summary

On this page

Background to this inspection

Updated 3 August 2016

Priory Rehabilitation Service Limited provides private health care for people with a diagnosed mental health disorder. Patients at The Priory Hospital, St Neots, are informal or detained under a section of the Mental Health Act 1983.

The Priory St Neots is a long stay rehabilitation hospital that supports up to 39 patients, providing 24-hour support seven days a week. At the time of this inspection, 27 patients were receiving care and treatment.

There were three wards, each meeting different patient need.

 Willow Ward – locked rehabilitation for male patients with a mental illness, 12 beds

Cherry  Ward – locked rehabilitation for male patients with a mental illness, 7 beds                      

  Maple Ward – locked rehabilitation for female patients with a mental illness, 19 beds

The hospital is registered with the Care Quality Commission to provide the following regulated activities:

  • Assessment or medical treatment for persons detained under the Mental Health Act 1983.
  • treatment for disease, disorder and injury
  • diagnostic and screening procedures
  • accommodation for persons who require nursing or personal care accommodation for persons who require treatment for substance misuse

There have been five inspections carried out by the Care Quality Commission at The Priory Hospital St Neots, the most recent of which took place on 21 January 2015. There were no breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) at that time.

Overall inspection

Good

Updated 3 August 2016

We rated The Priory Hospital, St Neots as good because:

  • The hospital was safe, visibly clean and well maintained. Staff completed cleaning records that showed the hospital was regularly cleaned throughout the day.
  • Staff stocked medication that was correct for patient’s needs. Staff completed physical health check records that were current and ongoing. Staff had access to emergency equipment and knew where to find this. The provider met the physical healthcare needs of its patients. There was a designated, fully equipped clinic room. The GP attended weekly for planned appointments. Patients could attend urgent appointments at the local GP surgery.
  • The provider had a policy and procedures for use of observation. Patients had one to one support, 15-minute checks or 30-minute checks depending on need. Staff ensured all paper and electronic patient information was stored securely. Care records and care plans contained up to date, personalised, holistic treatment goals.
  • The provider had an open, transparent approach to learning from incidents. Managers would debrief staff after an incident. Staff said they had opportunity to discuss and learn how to make improvements in safety.
  • Managers addressed staffing levels daily to ensure that was an appropriate staff to meet the needs of the patients. Hospital managers supported staff to deliver high quality care by promoting team working and mutual support. Eighty one per cent of staff were compliant with mandatory training. Staff and managers completed annual appraisals. The provider held regular staff team meetings. Staff knew how to spot safeguarding issues and how to report these effectively.
  • Patients were encouraged to share views and discuss any concerns or ideas. Staff interactions with patients were caring and senior management were approachable and friendly. Patients reported staff treated them kindly and with dignity.
  • Staff regularly informed patients of their rights under the Mental Health Act and reviewed detained patients paperwork regularly.
  • There were a variety of room for patients and their visitors to use including a family visiting room. Patients had access to a private garden where visitors could also sit. Patients could personalise their rooms and artwork made by patients was displayed throughout the hospital.

However:

  • Staff did not always inform all patients’ carers of new best interest decisions.
  • Some patients’ records we sampled did not describe what went well or how patients felt when they returned to the hospital from agreed leave.