Your Priority Healthcare Limited

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated requires improvement. This meant people did not always feel well-supported, cared for or treated with dignity and respect.

This service scored 60 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity.

We saw reviews from people that showed staff consistently treated them with kindness, respect and compassion. This was confirmed by the feedback we received as part of this inspection. The care records we viewed used appropriately respectful language and we saw that people’s dignity was considered as part of the delivery of care.

We could not be assured that the provider always treated people as individuals or made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. This was because care records did not consistently contain enough information to ensure staff always provided individualised care and support that met people’s needs, likes and preferences. In addition, there was limited information held about people’s life histories to help guide staff to fully understand people’s individual backgrounds, needs and responses. People did, however, see the same small group of staff, meaning staff got to know people’s needs and preferences.

The provider did not always promote people’s independence, so people did not always know their rights and have choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing. This was because call times were inconsistent meaning people were not always in control of the care they received. However, people generally spoke positively about the care they received, and we saw from care plans that people’s independence was considered.

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

Due to the small nature of the service, people received a dedicated service that met their needs and was flexible in doing so.

Whilst staff told us they were supported to deliver person-centred care, they gave us mixed views on how well supported and cared for they felt. For example, one staff member told us they didn’t always feel listened to whilst another said they felt improvements could be made in how they were managed. Records showed that staff had received recent supervisions however staff had not received appraisals as required. We also noted that although the provider had sought the feedback of their staff, not all concerns raised had been actioned.