Potensial Limited - 60 Park Road South

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. At our last assessment we rated this key question Good. At this assessment the rating has remained Good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were always learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. Staff reported accidents and incidents, and action was taken to help prevent them from happening again.

The provider had effective systems in place to identify and manage risks to people's safety. People were able to access healthcare professionals and maintain contact with family and friends outside the service. There were clear procedures for raising concerns and making complaints. Staff also had opportunities to take part in debriefs, discuss incidents, and share learning during regular team meetings.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

Staff had access to clear records, which helped make sure people received consistent care and support. People had hospital passports in an easy-to-use format so that healthcare professionals could quickly understand their health needs and the support they required. A family member told us that staff had successfully supported their relative to attend long overdue optician appointment for new glasses and dental appointments for teeth extractions. They said this positive outcome was achieved through staff getting to know their relative well consistently engaging with them in a positive and supportive manner.

Staff helped people prepare for healthcare appointments and made sure any adjustments they needed were in place. The service worked well with the local GP, helping people to access healthcare when needed.

People were supported in a consistent way when they became upset or distressed. Care plans included guidance on how staff could help people have a good day and reduce the chances of them becoming distressed. Staff understood the strategies in place and used them to support people effectively.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

Staff demonstrated a good understanding of their safeguarding responsibilities and knew how to report and escalate concerns appropriately. Staff confirmed they had completed safeguarding training and received regular refresher updates. One staff member told us, “I have completed safeguarding training and have regular updates. We discuss safeguarding and the vulnerability of the people we support in team meetings.”

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisations were in place for people where appropriate.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

Risks to people's health, safety, and wellbeing were appropriately assessed, with clear risk management plans in place to help staff minimise and manage identified risks. Care plans provided staff with practical information on how to support people safely while promoting their independence.

Staff knew people well and were able to recognise subtle changes in their mood, behaviour, or presentation that might indicate they were becoming anxious or distressed. This enabled staff to respond quickly and provide reassurance before situations escalated.

We observed staff using the strategies outlined in people's care plans to support them effectively. Staff responded calmly and consistently, helping people to manage their emotions and maintain their wellbeing.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

The provider had robust systems in place to identify, assess, and mitigate risks associated with the environment. Regular servicing, testing, and maintenance of utilities, equipment, and safety systems were carried out to help ensure the premises remained safe and fit for purpose.

Where maintenance issues were identified, prompt and appropriate action was taken to ensure repairs were completed and minimise any potential impact on people's safety and wellbeing. Records demonstrated that maintenance concerns were monitored and addressed in a timely manner.

Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs) were in place for people living at the service. These plans provided clear and personalised information about the support each person would require in the event of an emergency evacuation. Staff were familiar with these plans and understood how to support people safely should an emergency arise.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs.

Staff were recruited safely and appropriate checks were completed before they started work, including references from previous employers and DBS checks.

Staff received an induction and the training they needed for their roles and met regularly with managers to discuss their work, development, and any support they required.

There were enough staff on duty to meet people's needs and provide support when it was needed. Staffing arrangements were planned to ensure people received consistent care and support from staff who knew them well.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

The service was clean, well maintained, and supported good infection prevention and control practices. Staff had access to appropriate Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and were observed using it correctly when required.

People were supported and encouraged to take part in household tasks, helping them maintain their independence and develop daily living skills. People were supported to wear appropriate PPE when preparing food in the kitchen.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

People’s medicines were managed safely and administered in line with prescribing guidance. Medicines were stored securely, and the provider’s paper-based Medicines Administration Record (MAR) system accurately documented the support people received with their medicines. Staff responsible for administering medicines received appropriate training, and their competency was regularly assessed to ensure safe practice.

Medicines subject to additional controls were stored and managed appropriately, with the required records completed and maintained. The temperatures of medicine storage areas were routinely monitored to ensure medicines were stored safely.

The service was working in line with the principles of STOMP (Stopping Over Medication of People with a Learning Disability, Autism or Both). The registered manager and staff worked closely with relevant healthcare professionals to review people's medicines and reduce the use of medicines where this was clinically appropriate. Some people had prescribed medicines available on an 'as required' basis to support them during periods of anxiety. These medicines were used infrequently, and records demonstrated that staff documented the reasons for administration and evaluated their effectiveness to ensure people received appropriate and person-centred support.