Archived: People Potential (UK) Limited - 4a Geales Crescent

Geales Crescent, Alton, Hampshire, GU34 1EF (01420) 82369

Provided and run by:
People Potential UK Limited

All Inspections

20 September 2011

During an inspection looking at part of the service

The residents living at 4a Geales Crescent communicated using a variety of verbal and non-verbal methods including Makaton signing. Makaton signing is a simplified version of British Sign Language that is used by, and for, people who have a learning disability.

The staff also communicated with the residents by using symbols, pictures and objects.

We spent time observing the interactions between the staff and the residents to help us make a judgement about the outcomes.

We saw positive interactions and an appropriate use of touch and guidance. The residents appeared relaxed moving around their home and the staff were calm and reassuring even when faced with behaviour that was challenging.

The staff told us about the support they offered the residents and how well they knew each person. The staff said that changes to the way activities were organised since our last inspection meant the residents were more relaxed and there had been a reduction in challenging situations.

4 April 2011

During an inspection in response to concerns

The majority of the residents who live at this home have complex care needs and they communicate using some speech but also through noise, behaviour and gesture and Makaton signing. Makaton signing is a simplified version of British Sign Language that is used by, and for, people who have a learning disability.

We observed that the residents were smiling and communicating with the staff, moving around their home and taking part in activities such as going swimming, horse riding and going to college. There did appear to be some rush between activities for two residents which meant the lunch prepared and served was not the same as the picture on the menu board.

The staff said they had the training they needed to support the residents, but they were not all aware of the records about the residents' needs.

The residents had some restrictions on them and it was not always clear why these were in place.

All of the four relatives we spoke with were unhappy with a number of aspects of the service. These included the personal care, the activities and choices, the food options and the management of the home as well as the lack of effective communication when they made enquiries or complaints.

The occupational therapist who had visited the home frequently over the last year told us they had concerns about a number of aspects of the service, including inadequate communication between the manager and the staff, staff not putting advice into practice, or being very slow to change to meet the residents' needs. The therapist added they had witnessed inappropriate communication between the staff and the residents and that activities were not meeting the residents' individual needs. The therapist told us that the residents were not offered choices and they had restrictions on them without clear explanations as to why these were needed. However, the therapist did say that some of the staff were trying very hard to care for the residents in a way that did meet their needs.