Archived: Prestige Nursing and Care - Chelmsford

The inspection was carried out by one inspector.

Prestige Nursing and Care is a domiciliary care agency providing personal and palliative care to people in their own home. At the time of the inspection 36 people were using the service.

There was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

People felt safe. Staff had received training to enable them to recognise signs and symptoms of abuse and knew how to report them.

People had risk assessments in place to enable them to be as independent as they could be whilst being kept safe.

There were sufficient staff, with the correct skill mix, on duty to support people with their needs.

Effective recruitment processes were in place and followed by the service to ensure staff employed were suitable for the role.

Medicines were managed safely. The processes in place ensured that the administration and handling of medicines was suitable for the people who used the service. Some people administered their own medication.

Staff received a comprehensive induction process and on-going training. They were well supported by the registered manager and had regular one to one time for supervisions and annual appraisals.

Staff had attended a variety of training to ensure they were able to provide care based on current practice when supporting people.

Staff gained consent before supporting people. People were supported to make decisions about all aspects of their life; this was underpinned by the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards. Staff were knowledgeable of this guidance and correct processes were in place to protect people.

People were able to make choices about the food and drink they had, and staff gave support when required.

People were supported to access a variety of additional health professional when required. Staff provided care and support in a caring and meaningful way. They knew the people who used the service well. People and relatives, where appropriate, were involved in the planning of their care and support. People’s privacy and dignity was maintained at all times.

A complaints procedure was in place and accessible to all. People knew how to complain. Effective quality monitoring systems were in place. A variety of audits were carried out and used to drive improvement.

Is the service safe?

We saw the service had systems in place to ensure people received visits to their homes on time to provide their care. The service had an alert system that sent an email alert to the manager if calls were not attended. People we spoke with told us they had a schedule of which staff would be attending to provide their care. We noted all staff had photographic identification.

We saw that the staff were provided with training in safeguarding vulnerable adults from abuse, and the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005. This meant that staff were provided with the information that they needed to ensure that people were safeguarded and protected from harm.

We saw that staff were recruited appropriately and employed after appropriate checks were completed. We saw staff received training that was appropriate to their role. This meant people were cared for safely by staff who had the correct skills.

Is the service effective?

People's care records showed that care and treatment was planned and delivered in a way that was intended to ensure people's safety and welfare. The records were regularly reviewed and updated which meant that staff were provided with up to date information about how people's needs were to be met.

Is the service caring?

Staff we spoke with were able to demonstrate they knew people well. One person we spoke with told us they; 'Were happy with the service provided.'

Is the service responsive?

People using the service told us the service was; 'Very flexible and adjustable.' to their changing care needs. People told us they were in regular contact with the manager to discuss their needs and any changes were accommodated. We saw people's choices and decisions about their care were taken into account and listened to.

Is the service well-led?

The service had a quality monitoring system in place. Records seen by us showed that people were regularly asked for their feedback of the service. As a result the quality of the service had been maintained. We saw from records that staff received regular supervision and appraisals from the manager, to ensure staff performance was monitored.