Priestnall Court

Updated 5 January 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

This inspection was carried out over three days on the 7, 8 and 17 November 2017. Our visit on the 7 November 2017 was unannounced. The inspection team consisted of one adult social care inspector and an expert by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Before the inspection we reviewed information that we held about the service and the service provider. This included safeguarding and incident notifications which the provider had told us about. Statutory notifications are information the provider is legally required to send to us about significant events such as accidents, injuries and safeguarding notifications.

Since the last inspection we had been liaising with Stockport local authority quality assurance team and we considered this information as part of the planning process for this inspection.

On this occasion, we had not asked the service to complete a Provider Information Return (PIR) because we requested and received a completed one within the last 12 months. This is a document that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

During our inspection we used a method called Short Observational Framework for Inspection (SOFI). This involved observing staff interactions with people in their care. SOFI is a specific way of observing care to help us understand the experience of people who may not be able to tell us.

We walked around the home and looked in all communal areas, bathrooms, the kitchen, store room, medication rooms and a sample of all other rooms such as bedrooms.

During the three days of inspection, we reviewed a variety of documents such as, policies and procedures relating to the delivery of care and the administration and management of the home and staff. This included five people's individual care records, a sample of medicine administration records and three staff personnel files to check for information to demonstrate safe recruitment practices were taking place. We also looked at supervision and appraisal records, training records and records relating to the management of the home such as safety checks and quality assurance systems.

We spoke with ten people living at Preistnall Court two visitors, the provider one director, the registered manager, three care staff and one cook.

Updated 5 January 2018

This inspection was carried out over three days on the, 7, 8 and 17th of November. Our visit on the 7 November 2017 was unannounced. At the last inspection on 30, 31 January 2017 we rated the service as requires improvement overall. We identified four regulatory breaches of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) 2014, which related to medication administration, consent, safety checks, recruitment checks, staff training and induction. We also issued a warning notice for lack of good governance and we issued a fixed penalty notice for failing to submit required notifications to the Care Quality Commission.

This inspection was to check satisfactory improvements had been made and to review the ratings. The provider sent us an action plan that detailed how they would make improvements to become compliant with the regulations. At this inspection we found improvements to the service and found the warning notice to have been met.

Priestnall Court is situated in Heaton Mersey, a residential area of Stockport. The home provides support for up to twenty four people, who require help with personal care. At the time of our inspection twenty four people were living at the home. Nineteen bedrooms have en-suite bathrooms and are of single occupancy, although one double room is available for those wishing to share facilities. A passenger lift is available for easy access to the first floor level. On the ground floor the communal areas consist of a dining room, two lounges, one contained a television for people to watch and there was also a quieter lounge for people to sit and talk. Car parking spaces are available to the front of the building and there is a well maintained garden to the rear of the property. A variety of amenities are within easy reach, such as shops, a library, supermarket, pub, restaurant, park and a cinema. Public transport links to Stockport town centre are nearby.

A registered manager was in place. 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.

We saw there was a concerns and complaint policy included in the statement of purpose that was given to each person on admission to the home. The people living at Priestnall Court and the visiting relatives we spoke with told us they had no concerns or complaints.

From our observations of staff interactions and conversations with people living at the service, we saw staff had good relationships with the people they were caring for. The atmosphere felt relaxed and people told us they felt comfortable.

Activities were provided by the staff and visiting entertainers. The service utilised the supply of games and activities to help provide access to regular events throughout the week.

Procedures were in place to minimise the risk of harm to people using the service. People received their medicines safely and as prescribed by their doctor.

Staff were recruited following a safe and robust process to make sure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people.

People were supported by sufficient numbers of staff to support them to participate in their daily activities within their home. We found there was a systematic approach to determine the number of staff and range of skills required to meet the needs of the people who used the service. This meant the registered provider could show that the staffing levels and skill mix of staff was sufficient to meet the assessed needs of people living at Priestnall Court.

Staff were receiving regular supervision sessions and appraisal. This meant that staff were being appropriately guided and supported to fulfil their job role effectively. Staff received regular training and support to ensure they had the necessary skills and updates to fulfil their roles and meet people’s needs.

Staff spoken with understood the need to obtain verbal consent from people using the service before a care task was undertaken and staff were seen to obtain consent prior to providing care or support.

Risk screening tools had been developed to reflect any identified risks and these were recorded in people’s support plans. The risk screening tools gave staff clear instructions about what action to take in order to minimise risks for eg for falls.

People’s health needs were monitored, care plans had been developed to incorporate a lot of individual information relevant to each person. People had access to healthcare services Including a district nurse, dentist, optician and chiropodist. We found people were supported to attend hospital appointments as required.

We saw the food looked and smelt appetising and was attractively presented with good size portions. People told us they enjoyed the food.

The home was clean and well maintained and we saw staff had access to personal protective equipment (PPE) to help reduce the risk of cross infection.