Priory Nursing Agency & Homecare Limited

Updated 29 January 2020

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (the Act) as part of our regulatory functions. We checked whether the provider was meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Act. We looked at the overall quality of the service and provided a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Inspection team:

The inspection was carried out by one adult social care inspector.

Service and service type:

This service is a domiciliary care agency providing personal care to people living in their own homes. It provides a service to older adults and some younger adults. Not everyone who used the service received personal care. CQC only inspects where people receive personal care. This is help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating.

The service had a manager registered with the Care Quality Commission. This means that they and the provider are legally responsible for how the service is run and for the quality and safety of the care provided.

Notice of inspection:

We gave the service 48 hours notice of the inspection. This was because we needed to be sure that the provider or registered manager would be in the office to support the inspection.

We visited the office location on 8 January 2020 to see the registered manager and office staff and to review care records, policies and procedures and other records associated with the running of the service.

What we did before the inspection:

We reviewed information we held about the service such as reports about the service and statutory notifications. A statutory notification is information about important events, which the provider is required to send us by law. The provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they planned to make. We used this information as part of our planning.

During the inspection:

We spoke with the registered manager, the deputy manager and the care co-ordinator. We looked at six care records, six staff records, training records, policies and procedures, audits, satisfaction surveys and other records needed for the running of the service.

After the inspection

We spoke with five people who used the service, four relatives of people who used the service and seven care staff. We received feedback from two care professionals.

Updated 29 January 2020

About the service:

Priory Nursing Agency & Homecare Limited is a domiciliary care agency. The agency provides personal care to people living in their own homes in the community. There were approximately 45 people using the service at the time of our inspection.

People’s experience of using this service:

People and their relatives told us they were mostly satisfied with the care they received. They stated that staff were capable, did their jobs well and people felt safe when cared for by staff.

There were arrangements to protect people from potential risks. Risks to people’s health and wellbeing had been assessed. Risk assessments contained guidance for staff on minimising risks to people.

There were arrangements to protect people from abuse. Staff had received training on how to safeguard people and were aware of the procedure to follow if they suspected that people were subject to, or at risk of abuse.

People received their medicines as prescribed. Staff had received medicines administration training and knew how to administer medicines safely.

Staff were safely recruited, and essential pre-employment checks had been carried out. There were enough staff to attend to people’s needs. Staff had received appropriate training and support to ensure that they were able to carry out their duties. The registered manager and senior staff carried out regular supervision sessions, annual appraisals and spot checks.

The healthcare needs of people had been assessed and staff worked closely with healthcare professionals to meet the needs of people.

Staff encouraged people to have a healthy diet where this was part of their contracted responsibilities. They were aware that if there were significant fluctuations in people’s weight, they should alert their manager, relatives and professionals involved.

Staff understood their obligations regarding the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible.

People were treated with dignity and respect. Staff had received training on ensuring equality and valuing diversity and respecting the human rights of people.

The service provided people with person-centred care and support that met their individual needs and choices. People’s preferences and choices had been responded to.

The service took complaints seriously. Complaints recorded had been promptly responded to. With one exception, people and relatives were aware of who to complain to.

The service was well managed. Morale among staff was good. Management monitored the quality of the services provided via checks and audits. These audits were however, not sufficiently comprehensive. We have made a recommendation accordingly. The registered manager stated that they would ensure that audits were comprehensive.

Results of a recent satisfaction surveys indicated that people and their representatives were satisfied with the care and services provided.

For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk

Rating at last inspection:

The last rating for the service was Good (published on 13 June 2017).

Why we inspected:

This was a scheduled planned comprehensive inspection.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor the service through the information we receive. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.