Prestige Care & Support Ltd

Updated 13 August 2024

This inspection was prompted in part by notification of an incident following which a service user died. This incident is subject to further investigation by CQC as to whether any regulatory action should be taken. As a result, this inspection did not examine the circumstances of the incident. However, the information shared with CQC about the incident indicated potential concerns about the management of risk of choking. This inspection examined those risks. Prestige Care & Support Ltd provides care and support to people living in their own home. Not everyone using Prestige Care & Support Ltd received regulated activity; the CQC only inspects the service being received by people provided with ‘personal care’; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating. Where they do, we also take into account any wider social care provided. At the time of this inspection, there were 73 people using the service. This assessment was carried out without a visit to the location’s office. We used technology such as electronic file sharing to enable us to review documentation. We used an Expert by Experience to get feedback from people and relatives. An Expert by Experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. Assessment activity started on 22 August 2024 and ended on 23 September 2024. We looked at 23 quality statements as part of this assessment. We gave the service 48 hours’ notice of the inspection. This was because we wanted to make sure someone would be available to support us with the inspection.

Updated 13 August 2024

Robust safeguarding systems were not in place. Staff had not completed key training to perform their role effectively such as on catheter care. Robust risk assessments were not in place to ensure people received safe care particularly with eating and drinking and catheter care. Measures were not in place to minimise the risks of infection when supporting people. Robust systems were not in place to learn from lessons following incidents. Robust quality assurance systems were not in place to ensure shortfalls and to ensure there was a culture of continuous improvement. The service worked with healthcare professionals when required. Systems were in place to ensure staff were recruited safely. Medicines were being managed safely. There were enough staff working at the service to support people safely.