Archived: Prestige Nursing (Bristol)

There was a registered manager in post at the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service and has the legal responsibility for meeting the requirements of the law; as does the provider. 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.

Staff knew the signs of abuse and were confident to raise any concerns they had with the registered manager and provider. People and their representatives told us they were confident to raise any concerns they had with staff and that any concerns they had raised had been acted on. People had individual risk assessments so that staff had the information they needed to support them safely and minimise the identified risks.

People's medicines were being managed safely and administered by trained staff. Medicine administration records contained updated guidance to staff and were fully completed. Changes in people's health were identified quickly and staff supported people and their relatives to contact their health care professionals.

People spoke highly of the staff that provided their care and people’s relatives were also complimentary of staff. Staff we spoke with demonstrated they were aware of people’s individual needs and understood their preferences.

Staffing levels were sufficient to meet people’s needs and protected them from harm. The service carried out pre-employment checks on staff before they worked with people to assess their suitability.

Staff received regular supervision to discuss their progress and training needs. Spot checks were completed by senior staff to monitor staff performance and ensure people were receiving support in line with their needs and expectations.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. Staff understood the importance of gaining consent from people and acted in accordance with the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005. The registered manager knew when assessments of people's capacity to make decisions were needed. Staff assumed people had capacity and respected the decisions they made.

People told us staff were kind and caring and treated them with dignity and respect at all times. Staff were kind, caring and supported people if they became anxious. People who wished to were supported to develop their independence. Staff supported people to take part in leisure activities they liked.

People who used the service were provided with personalised care, which was based on their individual needs, wishes and goals. People were fully involved in the development of their care plans and felt their views and opinions about how their care was provided were encouraged. Care records were reviewed with people and they had been provided with sufficient information about the service. The service had had an effective system in place to manage complaints.

People received a service that was well led because the registered manager provided good leadership and management. Systems were in place to check on the standards within the service.

The registered manager had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of the service that people received. Quality assurance systems involved people who used the service.

People were provided with sufficient information about the services the agency provided and also how to raise a concern or report an issue. We spoke with four people who use the agency who told us they had copies of their care plans and they explained how they were involved in reviewing and changing the content if they needed to. They also told us they were confident that they knew how to make a complaint.

We spoke with three relatives and all said they were satisfied with the approach of the staff and that they had been involved or consulted in the planning of care. We found that staff received regular training and that they felt they were well supported by the managers and senior staff. We found that regular spot checks were completed by senior staff and that the views of the people using the service and relatives were regularly sought.

People described the service they received as, "brilliant", "they put themselves out", " the staff and management are friendly and have a lovely attitude". Relatives said, " They meet my relative's needs well ", "I know how to make a complaint but I know that I can discuss anything with the manager and they try to put things right".

People told us staff always respected their privacy and treated them with respect.They told us they felt able to raise any issues with the manager or staff should they have any concerns.

Staff told us about the training the service had arranged for them so they would recognise abuse and how to report it.

People's relatives told us that staff were always friendly and professional when they visited. One person said 'they are brilliant always on time. Another person told us "they are very caring I get on well with all of them".

Relatives confirmed staff took time to explain what was happening and made sure they agreed with any changes to the care needs of their family member. They were very pleased with the service provided. One relative said: "We are very pleased with Prestige. We have meeting with the agency once a month to discuss my relative's care needs. I find it really helpful'.

Another relative said: "staff are very caring and polite they go the extra mile to support my relative I couldn't find a single thing to complain about they are really good'.

We found the provider had systems in place to monitor their own compliance.

.