Primrose House

Peoples' experience of using this service and what we found Our observations showed people appeared at ease with staff. A healthcare professional spoke positively of the service and the care and treatment provided. Risks of abuse to people were minimised because the service had safeguarding systems and processes. Staff understood safeguarding reporting processes.

The environment was safe. Health and safety checks, together with effective checks of the environment were completed. People's medicines were safely managed, pre-employment recruitment checks were undertaken and there were sufficient staff on duty. The provider currently had a significant reliance on agency staff to ensure staffing levels were met. This was being addressed through a recruitment campaign to attract permanent staff.

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. There were systems in place to ensure that when people were deprived of their liberty, this was done with the appropriate legal authority. Where people had others acting lawfully on their behalf, appropriate records were maintained.

People, their relatives and a healthcare professional gave us positive feedback about the quality of care people received. The feedback about the registered manager from people and staff was positive. There were systems to obtain feedback from people, their relatives and staff. Quality monitoring systems were in place at service and provider level.

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