Prestbury House Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

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.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

People and relatives confirmed people’s needs were assessed prior to being admitted to the home. Relatives were kept up to date with changes to people needs. Comments included, “Before being admitted for respite, the manager and deputy manager visited us at home and we talked through the support required” and “The staff would ring me if any health changes, and I am fully included and involved in the care plan and changes would be discussed.” There was a resident of the day system to review people’s needs by all departments within the home. However, one relative said he had never been contacted as part of this review.

Staff told us they had access to information about people’s assessed needs and care plans. A staff member commented, “I know people and get to know what they need.”

The provider had procedures in place to safely move people to the home. Various assessment tools were used to assess people’s care needs. The provider’s had recently identified some care plans needed to be developed further to fully reflect how people’s assessed needs should be met in a personalised way. This work was being progressed. Reviews of people’s care needs were undertaken. However, the provider had identified they needed to ensure people and their relatives were always involved, and their input was recorded. This was part of the home’s ongoing improvement plan.

We did not look at Delivering evidence-based care and treatment during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at How staff, teams and services work together during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Supporting people to live healthier lives during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

We did not look at Monitoring and improving outcomes during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Effective.

People told us staff sought their consent and respected their wishes. One person told us, “I am very comfortable here, I don’t feel restricted I can get up when I want and sit where I want to, and I have made friends which is important to me.” Relatives gave us examples where staff had respected people’s wishes.

Overall, staff understood the need to seek consent from people and respected their rights. They had undertaken training in relation to The Mental Capacity Act 2005. A staff member told us, “People with capacity, when they say no it's totally no, they know what they want.”

The provider had systems in place to ensure staff understood they need to seek consent from people. Where required, peoples’ capacity to make decisions was assessed and best interest decisions were made and recorded. People had ‘capacity and consent’ care plans in place, to guide staff. However, during a local authority audit it was identified some reviews had not taken place. The manager was in the process of reviewing the system to ensure timely reviews always took place.