We carried out a review of the data available to us about Potensial Limited - 60 Park Road South 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 Potensial Limited - 60 Park Road South, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice.
¿ The service followed safe visiting procedures. Visits were restricted to essential visitors only. However, there were safe measures in place to facilitate visits for people receiving end of life care where it had been assessed as being in the persons best interest due to their wellbeing.
¿ Temperature checks and health screening assessments were completed on all visitors.
¿ Shielding and social distancing rules were complied with. The environment had been adapted to support social distancing. There were procedures in place that accommodated people should they develop COVID-19 or show symptoms.
¿ People had not been admitted to the service during the pandemic, however safe procedures were in place for when this occurred. Virtual assessments were to be completed, and people would only be admitted following evidence of a negative COVID-19 test. There was then a requirement for people to self-isolate for 14 days.
¿ Stocks of the right standard of personal protective equipment (PPE) were well maintained and staff used and disposed of it correctly.
¿ There was a designated Covid-19 lead on each shift the staff had to complete a 'Covid-19 staff self-assessment' that was to be carried out before start of every shift.
¿ People and staff had access to regular testing.
¿ Guidance on the use of PPE and current IPC procedures were clearly visible across the service.
¿ The registered manager and staff communicated regularly with family of people living in the home. They also had effective relationships with other professionals such as GP surgeries for the benefit of people living in the home.
¿ The registered manager supported staff with their well-being during the pandemic with supervision, informal chats and with help if staff were anxious.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
At our last inspection we rated the service good. At this inspection we found the evidence continued to support the rating of good and 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.
At this inspection we found the service remained Good, the service met all relevant fundamental standards.
It was clear from what people told us and what we observed that people liked living at the home. One person said to us, “I love living here. I love the staff. I won’t be moving.” People also told us that they felt safe. One person said about the staff, “I feel safe; I trust them and what they do.”
There were sufficient staff available to meet people’s support needs inside the home and in their community. Staff were well supported and received training relevant to their role including how to safeguard vulnerable adults and administer medication safely.
The home was clean and homely. Periodic assessments and checks took place to ensure the building and environment was safe. There had been adaptations to the environment so people can easily access the ground floor and gardens.
Each person had an individualised and person centred support plan. This outlined for staff what care and support each person needed and had agreed to. People’s support plans were written in a positive and respectful manner. The agreed support plan enabled people to have as much freedom as possible whilst remaining safe. We saw that people are supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff support them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service support this practice. People were supported to live as ordinary a lifestyle as possible and to get involved in their community.
The majority of the risk assessments we looked at were very thorough and showed that the support people received was person centred and was not risk averse. If risks were identified; sensible, proportionate and realistic guidelines were available for staff on how to keep people safe whilst respecting their freedom.
People’s support was progressive. The staff and registered manager were keen for people to make progress and become more independent and confident in their lives. People were able to tell us what goals were in their support plan. One person showed us their support plan and described it as, “My goals and plans for the future.”
People told us that the staff were caring, respectful and kind towards them. One person told us, “The staff are polite. They treat you right. I love the staff here. They have helped me to get this far.”
People personally knew the registered manager of the home and it was clear people had a positive relationship with them. People made positive comments about the registered manager and their support. Staff without exception told us that they were happy in their roles and felt well supported by the registered manager. The registered manager had a clear ethos of valuing people and having person centred approaches which were reflected in the culture of the service. It was clear that the registered manager was knowledgeable about and had oversight of the service.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.
The inspection took place on 4 and 7 February 2016 and was unannounced on the first day. The service is a care home providing accommodation and personal care for up to ten people who have a learning disability and/or mental health needs. It is part of the range of services provided by the Wirral-based company Potensial Limited. At the time of our visit, six people were living at the home and all were accommodated in single bedrooms.
The home is required to have a registered manager. 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.
At the time of our visit the service had a registered manager, a deputy manager, and 12 support staff.
We last inspected 60 Park Road South on 4 August 2014 when we found that the service was compliant in all of the areas we looked at.
There were enough qualified and experienced staff to meet people’s needs and the staff we spoke with had good knowledge of the support needs of the people who lived at the home. All staff had received training about safeguarding and this was updated every year.
The home was clean and records we looked at showed that regular environmental health and safety checks were carried out. We found that medicines were managed safely and records confirmed that people always received the medication prescribed by their doctor.
People had choices in all aspects of daily living. Menus were planned weekly to suit the individual choices of the people who lived at the home and alternatives were always available.
People were all registered with a local GP practice and had an annual health check. The care plans we looked at gave details of people’s medical history and medication, and information about the person’s life and their preferences. A 'health action plan' was in place for each person and there was a record of medical appointments people had attended.
The home implemented various methods of monitoring the quality of the service including daily checks, monthly audits, and satisfaction surveys. A monthly key worker summary was written for each of the people who lived at the home and a monthly meeting was held for people who used the service.
Is the service safe?
Two people who spoke to the expert by experience said :
'I do feel safe here.' and 'Yes, I am safe.'
The two staff who spoke to the expert by experience said:
'Yes, people are safe living here, we look after everyone's specific needs and they all have their own Personal Care Plans. We always make sure that there is enough staff to keep people safe.'
'Yes, they are safe and as independent as possible, we check at night that everywhere is secure. There is enough staff, we have three staff in the day and evening and two staff at night, one person is one to one support 24 hours.'
We saw that people's support needs were assessed and plans were in place for meeting their needs. Staff had received additional training to enable them to keep people safe.
Is the service effective?
People we spoke with considered that their needs were met at the home. They told us that they were supported to participate in community activities of their choice and to follow their hobbies and interests. Two people attended a day centre. People's individual needs were recorded in their care files and a 'Key Worker Review' was recorded monthly. People were supported to attend medical appointments.
Is the service caring?
People we spoke with said that they felt supported by the staff and one person told us that they were able to choose which member of staff would support them to attend a family funeral. A member of staff said:
'I believe this is the kind of job that you have to be kind and caring and I have no issues with any of the other staff, if I did have I would speak to my manager or my area manager.'
Is the service responsive?
We saw that people who lived at the home, visitors and staff were encouraged to express their views in monthly meetings and in satisfaction questionnaires. We saw an example of where an issue had been raised and had been addressed promptly.
Is the service well led?
The home had a registered manager who was supported by a senior support worker. An area manager was responsible for overseeing this and other services and visited regularly. We saw that all of the staff were involved in carrying out and recording regular check and audits.
When we visited on 15 November 2013 the two staff members who were on duty told us 'things are much better'. We saw that the care files had been reviewed and updated and put into new folders and had also been put onto the company's electronic system. Staff told us that information about the people who lived at the home was 'so much easier to read'. Appropriate information was recorded regarding a person new to the service and staff had been told about the person's care and support needs before they went to live there.
A programme of training had been put in place and was almost completed.
We had concerns about a lack of information in some people's care files regarding their past history and the assessment that had been carried out before they went to live at the home. Risk assessments had not been reviewed and revised when changes occurred. People's personal records were not always completed and filed in a satisfactory manner to enable staff to access important information.
Not all staff had received training about understanding and supporting people who had mental health needs.
The provider had systems in place for monitoring the quality of the service provided.
People had their own daily routines. One person attended a day centre Monday to Friday and another went to college. Some people went out independently while others needed staff support when going out to keep them safe. This was achieved by one to one support for these individuals for an agreed number of hours per week. Each person had their own written menu. People we spoke with knew about their care plans and had been able to contribute to them. Some people had close contact with their families.
The manager told us about the individual health needs of each person and there was information about these in their care plans. Everyone was registered with a local GP practice and they were supported to use dental and other health services in the community. Each person had a Health Passport which contained information about their medication, medical history, communication and special needs and could be taken with them when they accessed health services.
The home provided a good standard of accommodation and all bedrooms had en suite shower or bath and toilet.
One of the people using the service said she is very happy with the care and support she receives. Her comments included:
'Everything is brilliant',
'Things have changed since the new manager came; he is really nice and has had a positive influence on the home'.
'I can go to the office anytime',
'I'm very happy with the care'.
'I was fully involved in developing my care plan and very happy with this'.
'The staff are lovely, they are always there to talk to'.
Health care professionals involved in the service were spoken to. They had no concerns to raise about the service provided. Their comments included:
'I have noticed a significant improvement to the service since the new manager came into post. He handles things very well and I was very please with the outcome of a meeting I had with him and my client'. The quality of the service has certainly improved'.
'I have never had any concerns about the way my patient is looked after. A member of the care staff always accompanies her when she visits the surgery and they appear to have a good relationship'.
'The staff are receptive to my guidance and communication with my client is going well. Staff seem to understanding her issues better and are supporting her more effectively'.
Relatives had mixed views on the standard of the care provided at the home. Their comments included:
'Its difficult to say if any improvements have been made. The new manager seems to have changed things but its difficult to feel confident, as the staff have never followed through with any agreements before'.
'I am very happy with the care provided to my relative. Good changes have been made to the service since the new manager came into post. My relative seems much happier and more settled. I am always kept informed about what's going on and communication with the manager and staff is good.
'The staff are very good and support my relative well'.
'I am happy to look after my medication, the staff help me with this every day'
'I get good support from the staff, they are very good. I get to choose what I do during the day'.
'The staff are very good and things are much better since the acting manager started working at the home'.
'The staff are always there when I need them'.
'I'm very happy living here. The staff are great, things have improved since the acting manager started working here'.
Two health care professionals involved in the service raised concerns about the way the home was managed and that staff appeared not to be given proper guidance about how to support the people living there. They said this had resulted in an inconsistent approach to the way people are looked after. They said they were not always informed about incidents involving peoples' welfare. They acknowledged the overall management of the service had improved since the acting manager came into post. Both health care professionals spoke highly of the staff and said they were professional and worked hard under difficult circumstances.
A relative of one of the people using the service has made a complaint about the standard of the care provided to her relative. This complaint is currently being investigated. Another relative said that her relative's individual staffing support reduced over time. This issue was also raised by another relative who said that her relative's individual staffing support was not always provided. A relative of one of the people using the service said she felt the home lacked clear management. She said she was not always kept informed about what was going on with her relative and communication needed improving. She said the it appeared the staff were not able to cope her relative's challenging behaviour although they did their best to keep him safe.