We carried out a review of the data available to us about Porthgwara Nursing 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 Porthgwara Nursing Home, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
The service was clean throughout, and there were appropriate procedures to ensure any infection control risks were minimised. All communal areas had safe distancing seating arrangements. Regular discussions took place between staff and people to ensure they understood the reasons for social distancing. People who had limited capacity were sensitively encouraged to safe distance by staff.
Clear signage and sanitiser dispensers were in place around the service. Information notices were informative and highlighted what PPE was required to protect people and if any person living in the service was at higher risk.
The service was currently closed to visitors following government guidance. However, they had facilitated visits in the summer, for example window visits as all bedrooms oversaw a patio area which could be accessed without entering the home. They had also constructed a building called the ‘Pavilion’, in the garden area, which protected people from the elements. The Pavilion had a sealed Perspex divider with two separate entry points. PPE was offered and this enabled people to arrange appointments to see residents with the support of staff, while protecting them from the risk of infection. Staff also helped people to stay in touch with family and friends through phone and video calls. We saw a staff member reading a letter to a person during our visit.
People at high risk and those wishing to remain in their own rooms were supported by staff to occupy themselves. Staff provided activities whilst maintaining people’s safety.
The registered manager was communicating with people, staff and family members regularly to make sure everyone understood procedures and precautions being taken, and how to keep people safe.
The registered manager worked with the whole staff team to ensure infection prevention and control measures were in place. This included a review of the staffing areas to ensure that staff could take staggered breaks in a designated and safe area. Staff dedicated changing area included individual storage space for staff clothes and shoes. Uniforms were laundered on the premises to reduce the risk of cross infection.
Cleaning and infection control policies and procedures had been updated in line with Covid-19 guidance to help protect people, visitors and staff from the risk of infection. The registered manager kept up to date with appropriate training in infection control. The registered provider arranged and delivered training for staff to ensure they knew how to keep people safe during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Suitable testing routines had been arranged for staff and people who used the service. The registered manager said both staff and people who used the service had been happy to participate in regular testing.
Robust admission procedures were in place, for example, the service required documentary evidence of negative Covid-19 test results before people moved in, followed by a period of self-isolation.
The service had comprehensive policies and procedures in respect of Covid 19 and its implications on the running of the service. From our discussions and observations these had been effectively implemented.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
There was a registered manager in post who was responsible for the day-to-day running of the service. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
The management team demonstrated an open, transparent and reflective leadership style. They provided visible direction and a person centred approach to their staff teams. They exhibited a passion for providing a high quality service, which continually developed in order to meet people's needs in a holistic manner.
Professionals were highly complementary about the standard of care provided by the service. For example; “Porthgwara is an excellent nursing home with a conscientious manager who strives for the very best care for her residents. My patients in the home are well cared for in all respects,” and “All residents are well cared for, safe and happy with a holistic approach to their care.” and “This is an excellent well run home which cares for its residents with compassion and expertise.”
Staff demonstrated an exceptionally caring, compassionate and kind attitude towards people who lived at Porthgwara. People were highly complementary about the care they received from competent staff. There were many examples of how the caring approach of staff had a very positive impact on people’s lives. People told us; “It’s as near to home as you can get.”
Without exception family members all spoke extremely positively about the service their relatives received. They told us that their relative was very safe living at the service and that staff were kind, friendly and treated people in a way they could not have imagined. They told us that the registered provider, manager and staff were always available and approachable. For example, a relative commented; “I feel that not only my mother but I too, am totally supported by the Porthgwara family of management and staff.”
Relatives told us how well staff understood their family members. For example some people’s ability to communicate was affected by their disability but the staff were able to understand and provide for their needs effectively. Staff knew people’s care and support needs very well. A relative told us; “[Staff members name] can get mum to talk in a way that I can’t, they have just clicked. She knows my mums ways so well. It’s so lovely to see.”
The village of Coverack had experienced an extreme flood a few months before the inspection which cut off the village from the rest of the county. This had caused damage to the property and limited their access to utilities and the provision of essential supplies to the service. The road was assessed by the emergency services as being so damaged that staff could only access the home with emergency personnel escort. It was suggested at the time that people might have had to be airlifted out of the service to a safer location, however there would have been a serious risk to people’s health if this occurred. The owners and staff were highly committed to keeping people safe within the service and worked extremely hard with emergency services, contractors, food suppliers, medical services and health and social care professionals to ensure the service could continue to run as safely and smoothly as possible. A staff member commented; “When we had the storm some staff lost everything, their homes, but staff wanted to come to work and when you did, it put a smile on your face. It’s not hard, everyone here cares for each other, the residents, staff and the managers.”
Feedback from the emergency services, contractors and the Head of Adult Social Care was exceptionally positive about how well the owners and registered manager ensured that people continued to receive high quality care despite these extreme circumstances. They also praised the staff for their commitment in getting to work over such difficult terrain, and with their own personal circumstances, which meant people could continue to be cared for at the service.
People told us that despite the flood and some water entering the service they had always felt safe. One person commented; “I was lying in my bed as I can’t move, and I saw the water coming in through the patio doors of my room. Staff were fantastic. I knew I was safe, staff wouldn’t have it any other way.”
There was a calm and relaxed atmosphere in the service throughout the days of the inspection visits. We observed people had an excellent relationship with staff and staff interacted with people in an exceptionally caring and respectful manner. People were observed moving around the service without any restrictions. Staff were always available but discreet in their presence so people’s personal space was not impacted upon.
Safeguarding procedures were in place and staff had a good understanding of how to identify and act on any allegations of abuse. Incidents were logged, investigated and action taken to keep people safe. Risks to people’s health and safety were assessed and clear plans of care put in place to help keep people safe. These had been developed to minimise the potential risk of harm to people during the delivery of their care. Risk assessments had been kept under review and were relevant to the care provided.
There were always enough staff available to ensure people received continuous, attentive and discreet care and support. Staff had all the time they needed to respond to people’s choices as well as meeting their care and support needs in a way that suited the person. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible. For example, supporting people to move around the service both inside and out and by having the time to let the people take the lead and control of what they wanted to do, when they wanted to do it.
People were involved in the recruitment process as the management team felt it was essential that people had a ‘voice’ in who was recruited. Recruitment checks were carried out to ensure suitable staff were employed to work at the service.
Staff were supported by a system of induction, supervision and appraisal. The registered manager worked in partnership with health and social care organisations and Further Education establishments to ensure practice remained up to date. Staff received training relevant for their role and there were excellent opportunities for continued training support and development in the area of dementia care and specific health conditions.
Management and staff had a good understanding of the underlying principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice.
The manager used effective systems to record and report on, accidents and incidents and take action when required. These events were reviewed in order to help reduce the risk of them happening again.
People and their families were given information about how to complain. There were effective quality assurance systems in place to make sure that any areas for improvement were identified and addressed.
A fundamental aim of the home was to promote people's quality of life by providing positive opportunities for people to live life to the full. People were encouraged to maintain and develop interests which were important to them and this contributed to people living meaningful lives. The provider had established very strong links with the local community and hosted numerous events which had benefitted the people who lived at the service. For example, the local parent and toddler group held sessions at the service, the service hosted a garden party to which the community was invited as well as regular coffee mornings to raise money for charity. The providers believed that they needed to be part of and support their local community, and were keen to be involved in local projects. This demonstrated that the provider was committed to improve not just the lives of people living in their home but in the wider community and they were trying to positively influence and change the whole care sector in their area.
There were extremely effective quality assurance systems in place to make sure that any areas for improvement were identified and addressed. The registered provider was visible in the service and regularly observed and talked with people to check if they were happy and safe living at Porthgwara Nursing home. The service had a monthly Residents Association which fed into the managers meetings. This meant people were able to contribute ideas and suggestions and were fully involved in how the service was run.
Porthgwara is a nursing and residential care home which predominately provides care for primarily older people, some of whom have a form of dementia. The home can accommodate up to a maximum of 30 people. On the day of the inspection 29 people were living at the service. Some of the people at the time of our inspection had physical health needs and some mental frailty due to a diagnosis of dementia.
The service is required to have a registered manager and at the time of our inspection there was a registered manager in post. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the CQC to manage the service. Like registered providers, they are ‘registered persons’. Registered persons have legal responsibility for meeting the requirements in the Health and Social Care Act and associated Regulations about how the service is run.
We carried out this unannounced inspection of Porthgwara on 11 September 2015. We saw people were happy living at Porthgwara. The atmosphere was friendly and relaxed and we observed staff and people using the service enjoying each other’s company. People’s comments included “Staff are marvellous”,” There is no place like home but this is as good as it gets. This is my second home,” and “The staff are very kind and very understanding.” People told us they were completely satisfied with the care provided and the manner in which it was given.
People looked well cared for and their needs were met quickly and appropriately. People who used the service and their relatives were complimentary about the care they received from staff who they felt were knowledgeable and competent to meet their individual needs.
People told us “I feel safe here as I’m looked after so well.” They told us they were completely satisfied with the care provided and the manner in which it was given. Relatives felt their family member was cared for safely. Staff were aware of how to report any suspicions of abuse and had confidence that appropriate action would be taken.
People’s care and health needs were assessed prior to admission to the service. Staff ensured they found out as much information about the person as possible so that they could get to know the persons wishes and preferences. Relatives felt this gave staff a very good understanding of their family member and how they could care for them.
People were supported to live their lives in the way they chose. People’s preferences in how they wanted to spend their day were sought, listened to and respected. Activities were provided by the service individually and in a group format, such as for arts and crafts, outings and through outside entertainers coming into the service. Visitors told us they were always made welcome and were able to visit at any time.
The registered manager and staff had a good understanding of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and how to make sure people who did not have the mental capacity to make decisions for themselves had their legal rights protected. Where people did not have the capacity to make certain decisions the service involved family and relevant professionals to help ensure decisions were made in the person’s best interests.
People’s care plans identified the person’s care and health needs in depth and laid out how the person wished to be supported by the service. They were written in a manner that informed, guided and directed staff in how to approach and care for a person’s physical and emotional needs. Records showed staff had made referrals to relevant healthcare services quickly when changes to people’s health or wellbeing had been identified. Staff felt the care plans allowed a consistent approach when providing care so the person received effective care from all the staff. People that used the service and their relatives told us they were invited and attended care plan review meetings and found these meetings really helpful.
People told us staff were very caring and looked after them well. We saw staff providing care to people in a calm and sensitive manner and at the person’s pace. When staff talked with us about individuals in the service they spoke about them in a caring and compassionate manner. Staff demonstrated a really good knowledge of the people they supported. Peoples' privacy, dignity and independence were respected by staff. At this visit we undertook direct observations using the SOFI tool to see how people were cared for by staff. We saw many examples of kindness, patience and empathy from staff to people who lived at the service.
There were sufficient numbers of suitably qualified staff on duty to keep people safe and meet their needs. People said that staff respond to the call bell promptly, which we observed. Relatives echoed this view commenting staff were always available if they had any queries at any time. Staff raised that they felt there was an issue with the organisation of the staff rota the registered manager stated she would address this issue with staff.
Staff told us they did not attend meetings (called supervision) with their line managers but did attend an annual appraisal. The registered manager said that supervisions were available at any time a staff member requested them or at least once every six months. Staff attended ‘group supervisions’ which allowed staff to discuss new and current guidance. The registered manager and deputy manager had recently commenced observations of staff members work practise individually to highlight if any further training was needed. Staff had an annual appraisal to review their work performance over the year.
Staff attended regular training to ensure that their skills remained up to date with recent guidance. They all received a thorough induction when they started work at the home and fully understood
their roles and responsibilities , as well as the values and philosophy of the home. People and relatives felt staff were skilled and competent to undertake their job.
We saw the service’s complaints procedure which provided people with information on how to make a complaint. People and relatives told us they had no concerns at the time of the inspection and if they had any issues they felt able to address them with the management team.
The registered manager promoted a culture that was well led and centred on people’s needs. People told us how they were involved in decisions about their care and how the service was run. The management and running of the service was ‘person centred’ with people being consulted and involved in decision making. People were empowered by being actively involved in decision making so the service was run to reflect their needs and preferences.
The service was keen to gain the views of people’s relatives and health and social care professionals. Some of this was completed via a questionnaire and the results of these were compiled in a report which identified areas for improvement and any actions the provider needed to make. The provider had an effective system to regularly assess and monitor the quality of service that people received and was continuously trying to further improve the quality of the service.
The staff we spoke with demonstrated a sound knowledge of the care needs of the people who lived at the home. Staff told us the home was 'a lovely place' and it was 'friendly'. People who lived at the home and/or their representatives told us the care was 'very good' and one person told us 'the staff know if something's wrong'the GP is contacted straight away'.
People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.
People were protected from the risk of infection because appropriate guidance had been followed.
People who used the service, staff and visitors were protected against the risks of unsafe or unsuitable premises.
People were protected against the risks associated with medicines because the provider had appropriate arrangements in place to manage medicines. On the day of our inspection the registered manager assured us that a dispensing error that we witnessed would be addressed.
The staff respected people's likes and dislikes of the people that lived at the home. People were able to choose what food they would like. We heard staff talking with people in a respectful manner.
Staff demonstrated a sound knowledge of the care needs of most of the people that lived in the home. Everyone had a care plan in place that informed and directed staff how to care for a person.
Staff told us they were aware of the different types of abuse and how to respond to any allegations. The home did not hold any money for people that lived in the home.
There was a robust system in place to ensure that medication were ordered, stored and disposed of appropriately. The policies that were in place were in line with published guidance from professionals bodies. This ensured that the administration of medications were completed safely.
The quality of the service was monitored by means of a yearly survey. There was also a 'Resident and Relatives Association' which allowed people who used the service to express and concerns and to share their opinions of the service.