CQC report explained · a residential care home
What the CQC found at 35 Priory Grove
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Risks were managed positively, medicines were administered safely and the home was clean and well maintained.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff supported people's health, nutrition and independence and worked with healthcare professionals. Staff had relevant training, supervision and competency checks.
- Caring?
- Good
- Staff treated people with respect, protected their privacy and dignity, and supported their independence, choices and relationships.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care plans reflected people's routines, needs and communication preferences. People were supported to take part in activities suited to their interests and to follow their preferred routines.
- Well-led?
- Good
- The manager promoted a supportive, person-centred culture. Audits, meetings, surveys and reviews of incidents were used to monitor quality and make improvements.
What inspectors found, November 2019
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care across all five areas.
This was an unannounced planned inspection on 12 September 2019. One inspector spoke with staff and the manager, observed care, checked the home and reviewed care, medicine, staffing and management records. Feedback was also obtained from healthcare professionals.
The home supported four people in a small residential setting. Inspectors found that people were protected from abuse, supported by trained staff and helped to make choices, build independence and take part in activities they enjoyed.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. This means inspectors found consistently good outcomes and care, but a Good rating does not mean every possible improvement has been ruled out.
Positive risk support
People were supported to take part in activities that carried some risks while staff maintained their safety.
“People were encouraged to take positive risks to help them lead full and active life.” from the report
Health and nutrition
Staff supported people to access healthcare and follow professional advice. Dietary needs, preferences and weight were monitored.
“People achieved positive outcomes as their healthcare needs were met through appropriate support.” from the report
Respect and dignity
Inspectors saw respectful interactions and found that staff supported people's privacy, dignity and independence.
“People were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.” from the report
Personalised activities
Activities were based on people's interests and helped them enjoy their time, develop skills and stay connected with the community.
“Activities were tailored to people's interests and included going shopping, swimming, ice skating and to the park.” from the report
Good management
The manager and staff worked with families, professionals and each other. Audits and incident reviews helped the service monitor quality and safety.
“Systems continued to be effectively operated and had maintained the quality and safety of the service.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How would you adapt the current care plan to my relative's personal routines, communication needs and preferences?
- 02What activities could my relative take part in, and how would you support their interests and independence?
- 03How would you support my relative's health needs, appointments, diet and medicines?
- 04How would you involve my relative, family members or an advocate in decisions about care?
- 05How do you review risks and make sure staffing levels remain suitable for each person's needs?
This was an unannounced planned inspection covering all five CQC questions, including the care provided and the home environment. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 November 2019 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
What inspectors found, March 2017
35 Priory Grove was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with some inaccurate meal records.
This was an unannounced inspection on 3 February 2017. Inspectors observed care, spoke with relatives, staff and a visiting professional, and checked care records, medicines, recruitment files, accident records and quality checks. One person was living at the home at the time.
All five areas were rated Good: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough suitably checked staff, safe medicines arrangements, suitable risk plans and staff who understood the person's communication, health and support needs.
The home had improved since the previous inspection. Confidential files were now stored securely and new audits were helping to identify and address shortfalls. However, inspectors found some inaccurate records about meals and one missing food temperature record.
Kind communication
Staff were patient and used different ways to understand the person's wishes. They followed the person's communication guidance and offered choices.
“We noted that staff used their awareness of people's body language and vocal sounds to interpret people's wishes and needs.” from the report
Personalised care
Care plans recorded the person's preferences, routines, interests and support needs. They were reviewed regularly and changed when needs changed.
“We found care plans to be well organised, easy to follow and person centred.” from the report
Safe medicines and staffing
Inspectors found suitable staffing, safe recruitment checks and medicines that were ordered, stored and administered safely.
“We found medicines were stored securely and administered as prescribed.” from the report
Activities and relationships
The person was supported to attend clubs, go on outings and holidays, meet friends and maintain family relationships.
“People who used the service were encouraged to take part in a range of activities and maintain friendships.” from the report
Improved management
The home had acted on the previous inspection concern about confidential files. Its audits were helping to identify and address problems.
“During this inspection we saw that the registered provider had taken action to ensure that confidential files were held securely” from the report
Meal records were inaccurate
needs fixingA food and fluid record said the person had eaten lunch before the meal had taken place. Inspectors were told this was an error and that staff would be reminded to record information accurately.
“We discussed this with the registered manager and later with the care manager who both acknowledged this practice was not acceptable” from the report
One food temperature was not recorded
minorOne prepared meal did not have its temperature recorded. The manager said staff would be reminded about completing these records.
“We found that staff had omitted to record the temperature of one meal that had been prepared.” from the report
Some medicine temperature checks were missed
minorThe medicines room-temperature record had three omissions during January. The manager said further action would be taken.
“We found that this had been completed overall, but three omissions had been made during the month of January.” from the report
- 01How do you now check that food and fluid records are completed only after meals and drinks have been provided?
- 02What action was taken after the inaccurate lunch record found during the inspection?
- 03How are medicines room-temperature checks monitored so that no daily records are missed?
- 04How would you adapt the care plan and staffing if my relative's needs changed, especially at night?
- 05How would my relative and our family be involved in best-interest decisions and monthly care-plan reviews?
This was an unannounced inspection covering all five areas, but only one person was living at the home and inspectors relied mainly on observations and discussions because of communication difficulties. This explanation was written from the published report of 1 March 2017 by an AI system and checked against the report text: every quoted line appears in the report. It is a guide to the report, not a substitute for it. Read the full report on cqc.org.uk.
Every inspection of 35 Priory Grove
4 rated inspections over 4 years: the service has improved, from Requires improvement to Good.
- November 2019Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2017Goodup from Requires improvementSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- March 2016Requires improvementstayed Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Requires improvement
- October 2015Requires improvementSafe: Requires improvementEffective: Requires improvementCaring: Requires improvementResponsive: Requires improvementWell-led: Inadequate
- November 2013
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 29 November 2013.
Ratings and report dates from the Care Quality Commission, Open Government Licence v3.0. A home can also be visited without a new rating being published, so the timeline shows published inspections.
Weigh the report against the rest
Fees, photos and reviews from families
How to read CQC ratings and reports
What to check when you visit
13 live-in carers within about an hour of Kingston upon Hull, City of
These are self-employed carers on PrimeCarers, the introductory agency that runs this directory. Each has a profile with their own rates and reviews from families, and you choose who to talk to.
Most charge £1,020 to £1,350 a week. 12 can care for a couple. 8 years' experience on average.
“What truly stands out is how mindful and attentive she is to all of my medical needs, always going above and beyond to ensure I’m comfortable and well cared for.”
Every carer has had an enhanced DBS check in the last 18 months, ID and right-to-work checks and an online interview. Their skills and training are for you to check with them. Carers set their own rates, and who is free changes week to week.