- Care home
Priesty Fields Care Home
We served two warning notice's on Sandstone Care Cheshire Limited on 19 March 2025 for failing to meet the regulations related to safeguarding people from abuse and good governance at Priesty Fields Care Home.
Assessment report published 2 September 2025
Contents
Ratings
Our view of the service
Date of assessment:11 July to 4 August 2025, with site visits on 11, 15, 18 and 22 July 2025.The service is a care home providing support for up to 78 people, including older people with nursing needs and those living with dementia. At the time of the inspection 42 people were living at Priesty Fields Care Home.This assessment was to follow up on actions required after the last assessment. The provider was previously in breach of regulations relating to safe care, staffing, premises, safeguarding, fit and proper persons, person-centred care, nutritional needs, good governance and duty of candour. We rated the service as inadequate, and we issued warning notices in relation to safeguarding and governance.
At this assessment we assessed the key questions of safe, caring and well-led. We found the provider had made some improvements and met some of the breaches but remained in breach of regulations related to safe care and treatment, safeguarding and governance. The overall rating for the service has improved to requires improvement.Overall, we found an improving picture, however, we identified ongoing shortfalls in various areas including the assessment and recording of risk, medicines management, identifying and reporting safeguarding concerns and the governance of the service. These shortfalls indicated practice was not always consistent and changes which were in-progress needed to be further embedded and sustained.
Improvements to the service appeared evident since the provider had more recently introduced a new management team. An external consultancy organisation was temporarily supporting the provider to make improvements. Further changes were planned as a new permanent manager and clinical deputy manager had been appointed and were due to start.The management team had focused on improving the culture of the service and ensuring any safeguarding concerns were reported appropriately and lessons were learnt from accidents and incidents. Managers had introduced various systems in identify and address staff performance issues. New staff had been recruited and staff felt better supported through training and supervision. Staff morale was improving, and they said managers would now listen to them.
The provider had made improvements to the safety and cleanliness of the environment. Health and safety checks were undertaken. There was a focus on developing people’s care plans and supporting them with person centred goals.However, the provider’s governance and audits had not effectively identified and addressed all the issues we identified at this assessment. The provider was responsive to our feedback, and they took some immediate actions.
This service has been in Special Measures since 5 June 2025. The provider demonstrated some improvements have been made. The service is no longer rated as inadequate overall or in any of the key questions. Therefore, this service is no longer in Special Measures.We have asked the provider for an action plan in response to the concerns found at this assessment.
People's experience of this service
Overall, we received positive feedback from people and relatives about the support they received at Priesty Fields Care Home. People told us staff were kind and supportive and generally knew them well. Comments included, “The staff will do anything for me and are always asking how I am and if I need anything” and “I can’t complain, I get on well with the staff, we have a laugh.”
People indicated staff were aware of their wishes and respected their choices. In some cases, they had built effective relationships, and people said they were supported to feel at home. Some people were positive about their bedrooms, which were personalised and mentioned they enjoyed sitting outside in their patio areas.
We received mixed feedback about the availability and responsiveness of staff, some people said they had to wait occasionally, others said staff were supportive when they were available. A person told us, “I do use the call bell, and it can take a while sometimes before they come.” The provider was further reviewing the way the service was organised and how staff were deployed, in consultation with people and their relatives.Whilst people were very positive about the approach of the activity co-ordinator, feedback indicated people would like to see further activities on offer. The provider had employed 2 new workers to support this and were aiming to utilise other areas of the building, including the pub and cinema room.
People had previously raised concerns about the quality of the food, but people told us this was improving, and the meals served on the days we visited were well presented and looked appetizing. People were now involved in a food committee.
People and their relatives had been engaged in more regular meetings and communications with managers. Relatives were being contacted to be involved in care reviews, which were in-progress. Feedback indicated some people had seen some positive changes to the management of the service. Relatives indicated in the latest resident/relative meeting, they wanted to see ongoing improvements with better visibility and communication from the management team and were hoping for sustained improvements.