The Care Quality Commission
  • Care Home
  • Care home

Archived: Priory Court Nursing Home

Priory Road, Stamford, Lincolnshire, PE9 2EU (01780) 766130

Provided and run by:
HC-One Limited

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

All Inspections

22 April 2014

During a routine inspection

We considered our inspections findings to answer questions we always ask: Is the service caring? Is the service responsive? Is the service safe? Is the service effective? Is the service well led? This is a summary of what we found-

Is the service caring?

People told us that they were satisfied with the standard and quality of their support and care and often described this as being, 'Very good.' People also indicated to us that they liked the members of staff. Through our observations we found that members of staff were kind, caring and attentive.

Is the service responsive?

Improvements had been made since our previous inspection visit, which we carried out on 05 October 2013. We saw that people's individual physical, mental and social care and support risks and needs were assessed and planned for.

We found that people's individual health and wellbeing needs were appropriately met. This included support to maintain and promote their health and support to engage in meaningful social and recreational activities.

We saw people's individual support and care needs were being met and to their satisfaction. They said that this was because members of staff had treated them well and had helped them feel comfortable and well looked after.

Is the service safe?

People were very satisfied with how their support and care needs were being met by a consistent team of members of staff. This made people develop both trust and confidence in members of staffs' capabilities, which had made them feel safe.

There were systems in place to protect people from the risk of acquiring preventable infections. This included training of staff in appropriate management and control of such infections.

Risk assessments regarding people's individual health and safety were carried out and measures were in place to minimise these risks.

People were provided with safe and appropriate support and care by a sufficient number of trained and competent members of staff.

Although there were no people requiring support to restrict their freedom at the time of our inspection visit of 22 April 2014, there was staff training and information available for staff. This was regarding the application of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.

Is the service effective?

Members of staff were trained and supported to safely do their job.

People who used the service were satisfied with how they were actively consulted about their support and care, which they said they had agreed to.

People's health and wellbeing needs were effectively met. People had very positive comments to make about how they were supported to meet their individual needs.

Is the service well led?

Improvements had been made since out previous inspection, which we carried out on 05 October 2013. This was regarding the auditing and improvement in the standard and quality of people's care records.

People who used the service were provided with a range of opportunities to make suggestions and comments to improve the standard and quality of their support and care. These included taking part in monthly-held meetings and annual surveys.

Since our previous inspection of 05 October 2013, we have approved an application to register the care home manager.

If you wish to see the evidence supporting our summary please read the full report.

5 October 2013

During a routine inspection

We saw people experienced care and support from staff that respected their privacy and dignity and promoted their independence.

Care plans were not completed consistently and some did not contain up to date information. This meant staff may not have sufficient information to provide the care necessary. People's comments about their satisfaction with the care provided varied. For instance, a person said, 'They (the staff) are marvellous.' Another said, 'Sometimes they are good and attentive and sometimes they forget we are there and we have to wait for a long time.'

People were supported to have a varied and nutritious diet which offered choice and took into account specific dietary requirements and personal preferences.

The areas of the home we saw were clean and tidy. People said their rooms were comfortable and we saw equipment was provided to meet people's individual needs.

We looked at how the home was staffed. We saw the staff training programme covered a range of subjects. Whilst there was sufficient staff on duty to meet people's basic care needs, the deployment of staff did not consistently ensure needs were met in a timely fashion. People said staff were, 'Very busy.' Comments varied about how promptly staff came when called. Most comments about the staff team were positive. A person said, 'Staff give me lots of encouragement.' Another said, 'I feel I can have a laugh with them and a cry with them.'

We looked at how concerns and complaints are handled and responded to. Most people told us they knew how to raise a concern and were comfortable to do so. We saw complaints information was on display.

29 August 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We visited the home to follow up improvements since our last visit in May 2012. We spoke with seven people who told us they were satisfied with the care they had received.

One person said, 'I'm quite well looked after, the care staff are really nice.' Another person told us, 'I'm quite happy, the staff are all very nice to me. I don't need to use the call bell, the nurses come when I call out,' and, 'I think the care is reasonably good. Some of the staff are exceptional.'

We spoke with a relative who told us, 'The care staff are wonderful, they treat my sister with great care. I am happy with everything, no complaints.'

During our last visit, we saw that some people were not receiving their morning personal care until late into the afternoon. During this visit we saw that staffing levels had been increased on the nursing floor which meant that people received their care at an appropriate time.

We spoke with three staff who were working in the home on the day of our visit. One of the nurses told us, 'Things have definitely improved, the extra staff on the nursing floor has made a big difference. Staff morale is much higher and people are not being left in bed for so long in the morning.'

30 May 2012

During a routine inspection

During this inspection we used a method of working where an 'Expert by Experience' visited the home. An Expert by Experience is a person who because of their shared experience of using services, visits the service to help us get a picture of what it is like to use a service. The expert met and talked with six residents, two members of staff and two relatives. Their views are included in the main body of this report.

We visited home in January 2012 and found some concerns with staffing levels. People's needs were not being adequately met within an appropriate timescale. We made some compliance actions and whilst we found some areas of improvement during this visit we again found concerns about people's care and low staffing levels.

We saw a noticeable difference of experience between the nursing residents upstairs and the residential service on the ground floor.

People who lived on the ground floor told us they were happy with the service being provided. One person said, 'I don't wait long, if I press the bell.' The person told us they felt safe in the home and said, 'The food is good, there's plenty of choice.'

Another person told us, 'I'm being looked after very well.'

A relative told us, 'My mum's really happy here, she has a whole new social life now she's on one floor.' The resident confirmed that she was very happy and said, 'The staff never have a cross word, never even look fed up and always give me a cuddle at bed time.'

On the nursing floor we received comments which included, 'The place is going downhill.' They also told us the staff numbers were reducing and the staff didn't seem to want to do anything. The person felt that apart from the nurse in charge, the staff couldn't be bothered with her.

They had pressed the call bell to get assistance but staff told her they couldn't help as they were cleaning the tables. From that she perceived that this was more important than her care.

We spoke with a relative who said, 'My relative has problems getting their hearing aid in but staff don't always help or put it in without the battery in. They are totally dependent on their hearing aid and after complaining about this it's ok for a time but then it happens again.'

We saw one person was in distress and later found out from the nurse on duty that one of their regular pain relieving medications which was prescribed to prevent pain, had run out of stock the previous day. The nurse had administered an alternative medication which was prescribed however, the staff had not completed a pain assessment and no pain management plan was in place. We saw care staff had given a person a drink that had not been thickened when their care plan and risk assessment stated that it should have been.

At 2.30pm, five people on the nursing floor had not received assistance with personal care from when they had woken up that morning.

26 January 2012

During an inspection looking at part of the service

We spoke with four people who use the service to find out their experiences.

The majority of people who were able to talk with us said they had been satisfied with the service. Some people told us that they sometimes have to wait for assistance.

One person told us, 'It's very nice here. The staff are ever so nice. Whenever you want anything they get it for you.'

Another person said, 'The staff are kind, they do the best they can in the time they have. I have no complaints.'

Some people were unable to tell us their experiences, however we found some concerns with the care they receive. This information is included in the outcomes section of the report.