Archived: Prestige Nursing York

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. Where they do we also consider any wider social care provided.

People’s experience of using this service and what we found

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.

People were safe from harm. Systems, safe recruitment and effective risk management supported this. Sufficient numbers of staff were employed to support people with their assessed needs. Where people had been assessed as at risk from any activity, support plans provided guidance for staff to provide safe care and support.

Medicines were managed and administered safely. People told us, and records confirmed people had received their medicines as prescribed.

Staff received a structured induction to the service and individuals who they supported. Training, supervision and support enabled staff to work following best practice guidance which was of benefit to people who they supported. People had good relationships with staff who protected their individual rights and preferences.

People told us staff were kind, caring and respectful. Staff understood the importance of maintaining people’s privacy and dignity and encouraged their independence.

The provider completed oversight of the service to ensure quality assurance remained a priority and was effective in maintaining standards and driving improvements. Documents held in the office were secure to ensure confidentiality of people's information, and staff respected people's confidentiality when they supported them.

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 this service was Good (published 18 May 2017).

Why we inspected

This was a planned inspection based on the previous rating.

Follow up

We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.

We inspected this service on 7 and 19 April 2017. The registered provider was given 48 hours’ notice of our inspection, because the location provides a domiciliary care service and we needed to be sure that someone would be in the location’s office when we visited. At the time of our inspection there were nine people using the service. At the last inspection, the service was rated ‘Good’. At this inspection, we found the service remained ‘Good’.

People who used the service felt safe with the care and support that staff provided. People were protected from the risk of abuse by staff trained to identify and respond to safeguarding concerns.

Robust recruitment procedures were in place and sufficient staff were employed to ensure people’s needs were met. We received positive feedback about the consistency of staff that supported people who used the service. This enabled people to develop positive caring relationships with the staff that visited them and supported staff to get to know people and how best to meet their needs.

Care plans and risk assessments were used to provide guidance to staff on how to safely meet people’s needs. Care plans and risk assessments were person-centred.

Staff received comprehensive training and on-going supervisions, spot checks and appraisals were completed to support continued professional development. Systems were in place to support staff to safely administer medicines. Staff supported people to ensure they ate and drank enough.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. We spoke with the registered manager about maintaining clearer more robust records where there were concerns regarding people’s mental capacity.

People who used the service provided very positive feedback about the kind, caring and attentive staff that supported them. Staff supported people to have choice and control over their care and support and to maintain their privacy and dignity.

People who used the service, relatives and staff we spoke with told us the service was well-led. There was a positive atmosphere within the service. The service was well organised and there was a comprehensive system of audits to monitor the quality of the care and support provided. Although there had been no complaints about the service, there was a system in place to gather and respond to feedback about the service provided.

Further information is in the detailed findings below.

People were protected from the risk of infection because staff had received training and guidance which helped to protect all parties. And appropriate procedures were followed.

There were enough skilled and experienced staff to meet people's needs. This was confirmed by people we spoke with who said that the staff were skilled and professional. One person said 'It is the same few carers who look after me. They are skilled.'

The quality of the service being provided was monitored by the manager. There were effective complaints policies and procedures in place. Any issues found were acted upon to ensure people remained satisfied with the service they received.

People who use the service told us that they were happy and satisfied with the care and support being provided. Comments made to us during this review included, 'This agency is the best by far we have had.' 'The staff are very capable.' 'I cannot fault anything they do.' People also told us that staff supported them as they wished to be supported and were always professional.

When we spoke with staff they told us they were well trained and felt confident to do their work. They said that they were well supported by their management team and were provided with up to date information that they needed to do their jobs effectively.