Priory House is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as a single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. Priory House does not provide nursing care. It is registered for up to 29 older people some of whom may be living with dementia. The service also provides respite and rehabilitation services. Respite services provide care and accommodation for short periods of time. Rehabilitation services are generally for a set period of time to help people to recover from ill health, after leaving hospital. The service offers people support, and works together with occupational therapists and physiotherapists, to help people regain the independence they had prior to their illness. At the time of our inspection there were 15 people living there permanently, four people in respite beds and four people in the service for rehabilitation. There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. 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.
People were protected from the risk of harm and abuse. Staff were trained and demonstrated a good understanding of their responsibilities to keep people safe. The service had policies and procedures in place to guide staff, and they knew how to implement them. Risks were well managed. People were supported to take every-day risks to help them maintain their independence. Staffing levels were consistently good, they enabled people the opportunity to access the local community. The service had a robust recruitment process that ensured staff were suitable to work with vulnerable people. Medicine management was good. People received their medicines as prescribed. Staff had received training, and had a good knowledge of peoples’ medicine needs. There were good infection control policies, procedures and practices in place. The registered manager shared information with staff to ensure that lessons were learnt when things went wrong.
People’s needs had been fully assessed before they moved into the service and their care plans had been devised from the assessment process. Staff had received a good, thorough induction and were trained and supported to do their job. The registered manager worked well in partnership with other professionals to ensure people received the care they needed. People had sufficient home cooked, good quality food and drink to enable them to keep healthy. People received appropriate healthcare support, when needed. There were safety certificates in place and the building was in good order and was suitable for people’s needs. The registered manager had identified any issues and had plans in place to make any necessary improvements. People had as much choice and control over their lives as possible. The service worked in line with other legislation such as the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and had completed mental capacity assessments and Deprivation of Liberties (DoLS) where required to ensure people’s rights and freedoms were respected and protected.
People said staff knew them well, and told us all of the staff were kind, caring, compassionate and understanding. We saw that people were treated with dignity and respect and their privacy was maintained. Staff ensured that people were supported to maintain their independence, as much as possible. People and their families were actively involved in making decisions about their care.
People received person-centred care that was responsive to their changing needs. The care plans were written in a way that ensured people were supported to maintain their skills for as long as possible. The activities coordinator arranged activities to suit people’s needs throughout the day. People told us about the miniature horses that had visited the day before our inspection. They said how much they had enjoyed their interaction with the little animals. People also told us about other outings and picnics, saying how much they enjoyed them. There was a good, clear complaints system in place and people and their relatives said they were confident that concerns were dealt with quickly. The service had dealt with complaints swiftly and had recorded the outcomes.
People received a good quality service. The registered manager and staff shared a vision to ensure people were fully involved in their care, and to maintain their happiness. The aim was to provide individualised person-centred care that gave people as much control, choice and independence as possible. The registered manager told us they were a, “Mindful” employer, who valued staff and involved them in all aspects of the service.
There was an effective quality assurance system in place, where regular checks on systems, processes and practices identified any improvements needed. The registered manager had developed plans to ensure that improvements were made in a timely way. The service learnt from mistakes through discussions at team meetings, and made continual improvements to ensure people received a better service. The registered manager ensured that all interested parties were kept fully involved and worked well with other professionals to ensure that people received good quality person-centred care.
Further information is available in the detailed findings below.