What life is like for people using this service:

A relative told us they felt confident in the registered manager and the way Priority Plus operated. They told us good staffing levels afforded people responsive and dignified support.

The management team had safe recruitment procedures to ensure staff were suitable to work with vulnerable adults. No new staff had been employed since their registration.

Staff responsible for assisting people with their medicines had received training to ensure they had the competency and skills required. One staff member said, “Yes we have had training you can only administer medicines if you have done appropriate courses.”

Risk assessments had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. These had been kept under review and were relevant to the care provided.

Care plan information focused on a person-centred method of supporting people. Also, information contained what support was required. We discussed with the registered manager to ensure consent to care documentation was more prominent in care records. This had been implemented following the inspection visit and more detailed documentation around consent to care was now in place.

A relative of one person supported by the service told us they were treated with respect and by caring staff. The relative told us staff were kind caring and respectful when visiting their home.

People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. The policies and systems in the service supported this practice. We discussed the principles of the MCA and consent with staff and found they had a good awareness in accordance with domiciliary services.

We found Priority Plus had systems in place to ensure they could meet people’s diverse and cultural needs. Care records we looked at evidenced people and where appropriate relatives were fully included in their support planning.

A relative we spoke with and staff told us told us there were enough staff on duty to ensure the person received support and enable them to care in a timely way. In addition, sufficient staff were deployed with specific skills so that the person was supported and cared for according to their needs. A relative said, “Very happy with the staffing arrangements.”

The registered manager and organisation used a variety of methods to assess and monitor the quality of the service. These included staff meetings, spot checks, auditing of the service and surveys to seek people’s views about the service provided.

The service worked in partnership with other organisations to ensure they followed good practice and people in their care were safe.

There was a complaints procedure which was made available to people and their family when they commenced using the service.

More information is in Detailed Findings below.

Rating at last inspection:

Not rated.

About the service:

This service is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living in their own houses and flats in the community. It provides a service to adults and children. At the time of the inspection one person received 24-hour care from the service. The office is based in Coventry. The service provides care and support varying from short visits to 24 hours a day support.

Why we inspected:

This was a planned first inspection of the service since their registration with CQC.

Follow up:

We will continue to monitor intelligence we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme or if any issues or concerns are identified.