Prestbury House Care Home

We assessed 8 quality statements under the safe key question, identifying both good practices and areas of improvement. The overall rating for this key question is good. People told us they felt safe, this was reflected in feedback from relatives.

Risks relating to people were assessed, when changes occurred care plans and risk assessments were updated. However, we identified one example were a person's care plan and risk assessment was not updated. The manager addressed this immediately, who confirmed this was already an area of improvement they were currently undertaking to complete.

Processes where in place to review events that occurred across the service, this included the analysis of themes and trend to mitigate risks. However, we identified not all events reportable to CQC had been submitted.

Safe recruitment checks and training took place to induct staff into their role with ongoing learning opportunities.

The environment was well maintained. We identified a carpet required to be replaced, the manager had already taken action and was waiting for this work to be completed. People were given their medicines in line with the care requirements and the provider's policy.

We assessed 2 quality statements under the effective key question, identifying both areas of good practice and areas of improvement. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. Our rating for the key question has remained good.

People’s care needs were assessed prior to moving to Prestbury Care Home. The provider had identified that improvements over updating and further personalising people’s care plans were required, while ensuring relatives were involved in any ongoing review.

Staff sought consent prior to proving care to people, this was reflected in feedback. Staff confirmed training was completed in this area. Where people required support for decision making, systems were in place however, further improvements were required.

We assessed 1 quality statements under the caring key question, identifying both areas of good practice. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. Our rating for the key question has remained good.

People and relatives spoke approvingly of the care given by staff and the availability of activities and events for people. People spoke approvingly of communication between other care professionals to support with reablement and improving people independence, with the person in control of their care.

We assessed 1 quality statements under the responsive key question, identifying both areas of good practice and areas of improvement. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last inspection, which was good. Our rating for the key question has remained good.

Processes were in place to ensure that people’s individual needs were taken into account, this was evidenced in positive feedback we received from people.

Staff understood their role in these areas, who undertook training.

We identified some improvements of aspects of the environment of the home would benefit people living with dementia. The manager confirmed this being an area of improvement they were seeking to implement in the future.

We assessed 7 quality statements under the well-led key question, identifying both areas of good practice and areas of improvement. The overall rating for this key question is good.

The provider had introduced a home development plan through audits and checks that were in place and the manager was making the necessary improvements in those areas however, they did not identify areas of improvement found during our assessment such as actions relating to fire risk assessment and events not reported to CQC. The management team immediately took actions to address all feedback given during the assessment.

People, relatives and staff described the manager as approachable and accessible to discuss queries or concerns.

The provider worked with other agencies, to monitor the health of people and ensure people’s care needs were met. This was supported from feedback we received from external agencies.

Relatives and staff told us there were regular opportunities to provide feedback on the service and the management.

At the time of the assessment the manager had recently been appointed, an application had been submitted to register with CQC.