St Thomas' Priory

The following is CQC's published account of its assessment, published 7 April 2026. References to “we” mean CQC. It describes findings at that time.

Date of Assessment: 10 March to 26 March 2026. The service is a residential care home providing nursing care and support to adults of all ages, including adults with physical disabilities, mental health issues and people living with dementia. This inspection was carried out to follow up on the enforcement action taken at the last inspection. We reviewed whether the provider remained in breach of any legal regulations.

The provider was no longer in breach of the regulations relating to dignity and respect, and safe care and treatment. However, the service remained in breach of the regulation relating to good governance. We have requested an action plan from the provider to address the concerns identified during this inspection.

Lessons had been learned since the last inspection. There were now sufficient staffing levels, and improvements had been made regarding training, medicines management, and safeguarding processes. Staff continued to be recruited safely, and they encouraged positive risk taking.

However, some risks remained, particularly in the level of detail included in risk assessments, incident management and staff debrief processes, and the monitoring of equipment.

Nutritional support continued to be effective, and staff worked well as a team. Mental capacity assessments were completed when required, and applications for Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) were made appropriately. However, some care plans and monitoring records were still unclear or inconsistent.

People were treated with kindness and dignity, and staff responded sensitively to their needs. Care was mostly personalised, although some care plans lacked detail about people’s histories and preferences. Staff had relevant behavioural support training and told us they felt supported by the provider.

Staff responded promptly to changes in people’s health and worked effectively with external professionals. Activities and community involvement had improved; however, people who chose to stay in their rooms did not always receive the same level of access to social activities.

Feedback systems were in place for people and relatives to share their views, and the provider outlined plans for further development of the service.

Leaders promoted a positive culture and had strengthened governance arrangements, although these were not yet fully embedded. Audits had improved but did not always identify gaps in records. Communication with external professionals was inconsistent. Leaders were responsive and open to feedback, but further work was needed to ensure improvements were sustained and consistently applied.

This service has been in special measures since 10 December 2025. The provider demonstrated improvements to the service. The service is no longer rated as inadequate overall or in any of the key questions. Therefore, this service is no longer in special measures.