Care Quality Services Potter’s Court

On this page

• Overview
• Kindness, compassion and dignity
• Treating people as individuals
• Independence, choice and control
• Responding to people’s immediate needs
• Workforce wellbeing and enablement

Caring – this means we looked for evidence that the provider involved people and treated them with compassion, kindness, dignity and respect.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were supported and treated with dignity and respect; and involved as partners in their care.
 

This service scored 70 (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 always treated people with kindness, empathy and compassion and respected their privacy and dignity. Staff treated colleagues from other organisations with kindness and respect.

People told us staff were kind and caring. Comments included, “My carers (staff) are all so kind to me,” and “The carers that come to me are all kind and caring to me.”
Staff had a good knowledge of people’s individual preferences and preferred routines and how to support their welfare. Care plans detailed information around people’s family and important information related to their care. It also gave specific details about privacy requirements for people. This helped ensure staff understood what was important to people.
 

The provider treated people as individuals and made sure people’s care, support and treatment met people’s needs and preferences. They took account of people’s strengths, abilities, aspirations, culture and unique backgrounds and protected characteristics.

The provider considered people’s individual preferences and preferred routines around care which were detailed in people’s care plans. Staff treated people as individuals with information in their care plans supporting them to do so. These included information about people’s history, cultural, religious and spiritual needs to make them more personal. Staff asked people what they wanted done and how.
Staff we spoke with had a good understanding of the protected characteristics meaning these were considered when delivery care.
The provider made adjustments to meet people’s preferences, such as call times (where possible) and changing staff if needed.

The provider promoted people’s independence, so people knew their rights and had choice and control over their own care, treatment and wellbeing.

People told us they were given choice and control around their care. This was confirmed by the staff we spoke with. People told us staff supported them in the way they wished. They said they were involved in planning their care. Staff demonstrated an understanding of balancing people’s wishes around remaining independent with reducing risk. One staff member told us, “I will just encourage them to try and be as independent as possible. Get them to help if they can or do it for them if unable.” This meant staff did not encroach on people’s independence or de-skill them, whilst still helping them to keep safe. Staff also supported people with activities run by the provider. This included a weekly music quiz which went down well with the people attending.
 

The provider listened to and understood people’s needs, views and wishes. Staff responded to people’s needs in the moment and acted to minimise any discomfort, concern or distress.

People’s care plans documented where they had specific medical conditions and how these presented in everyday life. Staff had a good knowledge of recognising when people’s needs were changing and the appropriate action in response. The provider analysed care call times and care records to see if times needed to be changed. This helped them to identify when people’s needs were changing, and their care required adjusting. The provider responded to emergency call bells to ensure people were safe. Staff told us they carry an emergency phone to be able to do this, and there was backup if multiple calls happened.
 

Although the provider cared about and promote the wellbeing of their staff; not all staff felt supported or enabled to deliver person-centred care.
Staff told us they were not happy with breaks being 15 minutes, especially for those working on long day shifts. The registered manager told us they had tried to give staff more, but shorter, breaks, and would review breaks for staff going forward. However, better communication between management and staff was needed to address and resolve this issue.
Although the provider had a risk assessment in place when staff supported people who smoked, it did not fully consider the risks to staff during this call. The registered manager said they would ensure there was a robust and appropriate risk assessment in place for staff.
Most staff felt supported, finding supervisions worthwhile and training opportunities available, although there had been a low take up of further vocational qualifications. The provider had an on-call system for out of hours working and on-call staff would come out to support if needed.
The provider had anonymous mental health first aiders which staff could call for advice and support around their wellbeing and mental health.