Prestbury House Care Home

On this page

• Overview
• Person-centred Care
• Care provision, Integration and continuity
• Providing Information
• Listening to and involving people
• Equity in access
• Equity in experiences and outcomes
• Planning for the future

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.

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.

We did not look at Person-centred Care during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Care provision, Integration and continuity during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Providing Information during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Listening to and involving people during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

We did not look at Equity in access during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.

People’s feedback indicated a person-centred approach was promoted at the home. People had been involved in their care plans and told us their wishes were listened to. One relative said, “The kitchen staff are great; they go out of their way to be helpful.” Staff had sourced specific foods to meet the person’s dietary needs.

Staff understood the importance of treating people as individuals and tailoring the care and support to their wishes. Staff considered the needs of people who preferred to receive care from specific care staff. The manager ensured they were available to meet with and listen to people, relatives and staff.

Processes were in place to tailor people’s care and support understanding their experiences. Staff undertook training in person centred care and equality and diversity. People’s individual needs were taken into consideration, they had an emotional and spirituality care plan in place, to ensure staff understood their needs from a holistic perspective. Their preferences were recorded in their care plans. Information was available in accessible formats if people required this. Staff were trained to observe people living with dementia, to help assess whether their needs were being met in a person-centred way. One area of the home supported people living with dementia. Aspects of the environment could be more dementia friendly. For example, menus were available, but these were not always easy to read or accessible. There was no clear signage to guide people around the home. The manager told us actions were already in progress and the provider’s dementia lead was developing a new strategy in relation to this.

We did not look at Planning for the future during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Responsive.