We carried out a review of the data available to us about Poplars Care Home on 6 July 2023. We have not found evidence that we need to carry out an inspection or reassess our rating at this stage.
This could change at any time if we receive new information. We will continue to monitor data about this service.
If you have concerns about Poplars Care Home, you can give feedback on this service.
Poplars care home is a residential care home for older people who may be living with dementia. It is an adapted domestic property in a residential area with accommodation over two floors. The service accommodated up to 14 people in single and shared bedrooms. At the time of our inspection there were 14 people using the service.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People were happy with the quality of the care provided. Their feedback included, “I'm very happy”, “Staff are good” and “Staff smile, it goes a long way.” People and staff reported there were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs.
The provider had taken measures to ensure the building was safe. We have made two recommendations, one for the provider to review guidance about when a new fire risk assessment is required and a second about them accessing guidance on water temperature probes.
Staff ensured potential risks to people had been assessed and managed safely. People were safe and protected from the risk of abuse and discrimination. People received their medicines safely. Processes were in place to protect people from the risks of acquiring an infection. The provider reviewed incidents to identify if any actions were required.
The provider promoted a positive culture within the service. They engaged people, their relatives and stakeholders. They sought their views on the service and used their feedback to make improvements. The provider had processes to assess the quality of the service provided and to identify potential areas for improvement. Staff worked across agencies to support the provision of peoples’ care safely.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update
The last rating for this service was requires improvement (published 30 April 2020). At this inspection it has improved to good.
At our last inspection we recommended the provider review national falls guidance. At this inspection we found the provider had taken relevant action.
Why we inspected
This focussed inspection was prompted by a review of the information we held about this service. This report only covers our findings in relation to the Key Questions of Safe and Well-led.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service, which will help inform when we next inspect.
Poplars care home is a residential care home for older people and people living with dementia. It is an adapted domestic property in a residential area with accommodation over two floors. The service accommodated up to 14 people in single and shared rooms.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
The service had made a number of improvements, including:the premises, people’s support plans and other records; also in relation to staff’s induction and training and to the management of medicines.
There were sufficient numbers of suitably trained staff in place to keep people safe. The service was visibly clean. Medicines were managed safely. Further improvements were required in relation to the monitoring of changes in people’s medicines and monitoring of falls in line with national guidance to ensure risks to people were minimised.
The service had worked to implement best practice guidance, and this was an area of continued improvement. People had enough food and were encouraged to drink enough. People’s risks related to their eating and drinking were managed well. Staff felt supported and had access to appropriate training. The premises had been further adapted in line with dementia friendly guidance, however some further minor work was required.
People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
Staff were caring and kind towards people. People were treated with dignity and respect and their independence in daily activities was promoted. Staff were now more mindful of people’s privacy and treated sensitive information confidentially. People and their relatives told us staff were nice.
The service had improved the activities available for people living with dementia and for people of different abilities and interests. Care was personalised to meet people’s needs and staff worked to reduce social isolation through reminiscence and other activities.
The service had been through a period of significant change and improvement. Staff reflected there had been many improvements which meant they now had more time for people. One member of staff expressed worry that improvements would not be sustained. People’s care records had been updated and were now accurate. Some further improvements were required to existing quality assurance measures to ensure all issues and areas for improvement were proactively identified.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Rating at last inspection and update
The last rating for this service was inadequate (published 6 September 2019) and there were multiple breaches of regulations. The provider completed an action plan after the last inspection to show what they would do and by when to improve. At this inspection we found improvements had been made and the provider was no longer in breach of regulations.
This service has been in Special Measures since 6 September 2019. During this inspection the provider demonstrated that improvements have been made. 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.
Why we inspected
This inspection was carried out to follow up on action we told the provider to take at the last inspection.
Follow up
We will continue to monitor information we receive about the service until we return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
Poplars Care Home is a care home which can accommodate up to 14 people in one adapted building. At the time of inspection, there were 14 older people at the home, all of whom were living with dementia.
People’s experience of using this service and what we found
People living at the home were not always safe. There was not enough staff deployed to ensure people’s needs were meet in a person-centred way, this meant staff were task focused and spoke with people in an instructional way which did not promote their choice and independence. One person said, “They tell me what to do and I do it.”
Although staff were aware of the risks related to people’s care, the records did not always provide adequate guidance to staff on how to manage those risks. People’s medicines were not always managed safely; the home was not always clean and the systems in place to manage infection control were not always effective.
People were not always supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff did not always support them in the least restrictive way possible and in their best interests; the policies and systems in the service did not always support this practice.
Staff had access to training to enable them to meet people’s needs. However, there was not a structured induction process for staff new to the home. We have made a recommendation about developing an induction process in line with best practice.
People’s privacy and dignity was not always respected and people did not always receive support that met their religious and cultural needs. People’s wellbeing was not always enhanced though meaningful activities. One person told us, “You wake up here and go to bed here. There’s not much to look forward to.”
The provider had failed to ensure records related to people’s care were accurate and up to date; and their quality assurance processes were not robust and did not identify the concerns found during the inspection.
People’s families told us they felt involved in their relatives’ care and support decisions. The registered manager dealt with complaints in an effective way. Staff had received safeguarding training and knew what action to take if they had any concerns regarding people being abused.
Staff were aware of people who needed extra help with communication and sensory loss and supported them in a positive way. People had enough to eat and drink.
The registered manager was aware of their responsibility under their registration. The rating from the previous inspection was published on their website and they notified the appropriate authority when appropriate.
For more details, please see the full report which is on the CQC website at www.cqc.org.uk
Enforcement
We have identified breaches in relation to staffing levels, the management of risk, the safe management of medicines, delivering person centred care, respecting people’s dignity and privacy, maintaining up to date and accurate records and a lack of an effective quality assurance process at this inspection.
Please see the action we have told the provider to take at the end of this report.
Full information about CQC’s regulatory response to the more serious concerns found during inspections is added to reports after any representations and appeals have been concluded.
Follow up
We will meet with the provider following this report being published to discuss how they will make changes to ensure they improve their rating to at least good. We will work with the local authority to monitor progress. We will return to visit as per our re-inspection programme. If we receive any concerning information we may inspect sooner.
The overall rating for this service is ‘inadequate’ and the service is therefore in ‘special measures’. This means we will keep the service under review and, if we do not propose to cancel the provider’s registration, we will re-inspect within 6 months to check for significant improvements.
If the provider has not made enough improvement within this timeframe and there is still a rating of inadequate for any key question or overall rating, we will take action in line with our enforcement procedures. This will mean we will begin the process of preventing the provider from operating this service. This will usually lead to cancellation of their registration or to varying the conditions the registration.
For adult social care services, the maximum time for being in special measures will usually be no more than 12 months. If the service has demonstrated improvements when we inspect it and it is no longer rated as inadequate for any of the five key questions it will no longer be in special measures.
Poplars Care Home provides accommodation and care for 14 older people, some of whom were living with dementia. There were 14 people living at the home when we visited. The home is situated in a quiet cul-de-sac near to Southampton University and Southampton Common.
The home had a registered manager who was also the provider. They had appointed a manager and had made application for them to become the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. This meant the manager was a dual registered person. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
People’s capacity to make decisions was assessed. The provider was aware of their responsibility under the Mental Capacity Act and the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards.
Risk assessments covered environmental and personal safety aspects of people’s care. People were protected from abuse as staff had received training in safeguarding and knew how to report any concerns. The provider had appropriate processes and policies in place regarding safeguarding. There were sufficient staff to support people. Staff received sufficient training and supervisions to enable them to provide appropriate care. There were safe recruitment practices to ensure staff were suitable to work in the home.
Medicines were stored, administered and monitored appropriately. We observed people receiving their medicines safely. Concerns about hygiene in one part of the home had been identified and action taken to address this.
People received support to eat and drink and maintain healthy diets. People were able to access support to maintain good health. People had access to medical support when they required it either in the home or to attend appointments.
People and staff told us about the homely feel of the home which encouraged strong and positive relationships between them. People said they were treated kindly by friendly staff. Staff demonstrated how they treated people with dignity and respect. Staff respected people’s privacy and prompted them to be as independent as possible.
Where people were unable to express their views and be involved in decisions about their care, the service engaged the relatives who had appropriate authority to make those decisions. Some people felt they were involved in decisions about their care and others knew their relatives did this on their behalf.
There was a positive culture that was person centred. People, their relatives and staff told us how approachable and open the provider and manager were. The manager and provider were supportive to staff and communicated well with relatives, people and staff about their plans for the service. The provider and manager carried out a wide range of audits to monitor the quality of the service they provided.