You are here

Potensial North East Supported Living - 6 High Street Good

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 29 December 2018

The inspection took place on 16 October 2018 and was unannounced. This meant the provider did not know we would be visiting.

At our last inspection in March 2016 we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good. There was no evidence or information from our inspection and ongoing monitoring that demonstrated serious risks or concerns. This inspection report is written in a shorter format because our overall rating of the service has not changed since our last inspection.

Potensial North East Supported Living is a domiciliary care agency. It provides personal care to people living at 6 High Street in one large property. It provides a service to older adults and younger disabled adults. This service provides care and support to people living in 'supported living’ settings, so that they can live as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; this inspection looked at people’s personal care and support.

On the day of our inspection there were five people using the service.

The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. The goal is that people with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.

The service manager was overseeing the operation of the care service and had applied to become the registered manager. A registered manager is a person who has registered with the Care Quality Commission (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 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

Staff told us they worked well as an individual team but every staff member we spoke with expressed concerns over the imminent future of leadership at the service. We did see that the outgoing manager had arranged staff meetings to update staff as far as they were able.

Staff had been trained in safeguarding issues and knew how to recognise and report any abuse. We saw the service worked proactively to support people to manage any anxiety or distress and they had worked well with other services to maintain people in their home environment.

We reviewed the systems for the management of medicines and found that people received their medicines safely and there were clear guidelines in place for staff to follow.

Appropriate checks of the building and maintenance systems were undertaken to ensure health and safety requirements were met.

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.

There were enough staff to meet people's needs. Any new staff were appropriately vetted to make sure they were suitable and had the skills to work at the service. The staff were given support by means of regular training, supervision and appraisal.

People's dietary needs were fully understood and people told us staff encouraged them to eat a healthy diet.

People were supported, where appropriate, to manage their health needs. Staff responded promptly to any changes in the person’s health or general demeanour.

People told us they knew how to raise a concern if they were unhappy with anything and we saw people were asked about their views of the service.

People were supported to access a variety of learning, employment and leisure opportunities and were an active part of local community life.

Systems were in place for auditing the quality of the service and for making improvements. We saw the manager was keen to share learning from incidents and to

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 29 December 2018

The service remained good.

Effective

Good

Updated 29 December 2018

The service remained good.

Caring

Good

Updated 29 December 2018

The service remained good.

Responsive

Good

Updated 29 December 2018

The service remained good.

Well-led

Good

Updated 29 December 2018

The service remained good.