CQC report explained · a nursing home
What the CQC found at Priory Court Nursing Care Home
Rated Good: inspectors found the home performing well and meeting their expectations.
- Safe?
- Good
- People felt safe, safeguarding systems were in place and there were enough suitably checked staff. Medicines, infection control, risk assessments and emergency evacuation plans were managed safely.
- Effective?
- Good
- Staff were trained, supported and supervised. People's nutrition and healthcare needs were managed well, but inspectors found that some documents for one person had not been completed after admission.
- Caring?
- Good
- People said staff were kind and attentive. Inspectors saw people treated with dignity and respect, with consent sought before care and support.
- Responsive?
- Good
- Care was person-centred and reflected people's needs, preferences and routines. The home provided communication aids, activities and support to raise complaints.
- Well-led?
- Good
- People and staff spoke positively about the management. Audits, feedback, team meetings and partnership working were used to monitor quality and improve care.
What inspectors found, January 2020
Rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and responsive care, with some care records needing completion.
This was an unannounced inspection on 7 January 2020. Inspectors spoke with 10 people, two relatives and 12 staff. They reviewed care records, medicines, staffing, training, meals, complaints and management checks.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. People said they felt safe, staff were kind, medicines were managed safely and there were enough staff.
Inspectors found that care was personalised and people had access to activities, healthcare and support with food and drink. They found one person's care documents were incomplete after admission, and recommended better record keeping.
The overall Good rating means inspectors found the home was meeting the relevant standards at the time of this inspection. The previous rating was also Good, published on 13 July 2017.
People felt safe
People told inspectors they felt safe. Staff understood how to recognise and respond to possible abuse or harm.
“People were happy living in the home and felt safe.” from the report
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff treating people politely, respectfully and compassionately. People said their privacy and dignity were respected.
“People were supported by caring and respectful staff.” from the report
Safe medicines support
Inspectors observed medicines being given correctly and signed for afterwards. Regular checks were used to identify and address concerns.
“Medicines were managed safely and people received their medicines when they should.” from the report
Personalised activities and support
Care was based on individual needs, preferences and routines. People could take part in activities such as outings, entertainment and bingo.
“People told us a varied range of social activities were organised to keep them entertained and stimulated.” from the report
Active quality monitoring
The provider used audits and checks covering areas such as medicines and care records. Inspectors found evidence that action was taken when issues were identified.
“The provider had systems in place to ensure the quality of service was regularly assessed and monitored.” from the report
Incomplete care records
needs fixingOne person had several documents that had not been completed after admission. The manager arranged for the records to be completed and began reviewing all care plans, but inspectors recommended seeking advice about record keeping.
“However, one person had several documents which had not been completed following their admission to the home.” from the report
- 01How do you make sure every person's care plan and admission records are completed promptly?
- 02How often are care plans reviewed, and can my relative and family be involved in those reviews?
- 03What activities would be available for my relative, and how would you adapt them to their interests and abilities?
- 04How would you support my relative's specific communication, nursing and healthcare needs?
- 05How do you check that medicines are given safely and at the right time?
This was an unannounced planned inspection that considered the premises and care provided, and assessed all five CQC questions. This explanation was written from the published report of 21 January 2020 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, July 2017
Priory Court Nursing Care Home was rated Good; inspectors found safe, kind and personalised care, with no breaches reported.
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection on 14 June 2017. Inspectors spoke with people living at the home, a relative, staff and managers. They observed care and reviewed care records, medicines, training, recruitment, staffing, meals and the building.
The home was rated Good in all five areas: Safe, Effective, Caring, Responsive and Well-led. Inspectors found enough staff, safe medicines systems, suitable risk assessments and good infection control. People received support with food, drinks and healthcare.
Inspectors saw staff treating people with kindness, patience and respect. Care plans were detailed and reflected people's preferences. The home had activities, a complaints process and systems for checking and improving the service.
The home remained Good, which was the same rating as at the previous inspection.
Kind and respectful care
Inspectors saw staff being patient, affectionate and respectful. People said they were happy with their care and liked the staff.
“We saw they were kind and patient and showed affection towards people in their care.” from the report
Safe staffing and medicines
The home had enough staff to meet people's needs. Inspectors found medicines were ordered, stored, given and recorded safely.
“We found staff had been recruited safely, appropriately trained and supported.” from the report
Personalised support
Care plans described people's support needs and preferences. Staff provided activities and one-to-one time for people who did not want group activities.
“Three care plans we looked at were detailed and clear about support needs of people and how they wanted their care delivered.” from the report
Good oversight
The manager used regular audits to check the building and care plans, and the home had clear lines of responsibility.
“Regular audits had been completed. These included checking the building and care plans of people who lived at the home.” from the report
Inspectors raised no specific concerns in this report.
- 01How will you assess and review my relative's individual risks, especially if their mobility or health changes?
- 02How do you make sure there are enough trained staff on every shift, including at night?
- 03How will you support my relative's dietary, hydration or swallowing needs?
- 04What activities and one-to-one support would be available if my relative did not want to join group activities?
- 05What recent changes have resulted from your care plan, building or other quality audits?
This was an unannounced comprehensive inspection covering all five questions and the overall quality of the home; the previous inspection had also rated the home Good. This explanation was written from the published report of 13 July 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 Priory Court Nursing Care Home
3 rated inspections over 5 years: the service has held its Good rating throughout.
- January 2020Goodcurrent ratingstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Priory Court Nursing Care Home →
- July 2017Goodstayed GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
Read what inspectors found at Priory Court Nursing Care Home →
- April 2015GoodSafe: GoodEffective: GoodCaring: GoodResponsive: GoodWell-led: Good
- November 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- February 2013
Report published without a new overall rating.
- July 2011
Report published without a new overall rating.
- December 2010
Registered with the Care Quality Commission on 15 December 2010.
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
85 live-in carers within about an hour of Lancashire
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 £980 to £1,260 a week. 78 can care for a couple. 11 years' experience on average.
“She understands the needs of an elderly person in the early stages of dementia and has treated my mother with great kindness and skill.”
“Thanks to Tracy, Dad was always immaculately dressed and clean, his meals were all home cooked and nutritionally well balanced and his home was always kept really clean and tidy.”
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.