Care Quality Services Potter’s Court

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence.

This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.
 

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 made sure people’s care and treatment was effective by assessing and reviewing their health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.
They completed initial assessments of people’s needs prior to care packages commencing. Assessments incorporated information from people and professionals; to help ensure they reflected the care required. Care plans were clear, detailed and person-centred, and included how staff were to support people to meet their needs.
People told us they received reviews of their care to ensure their care plan met their current needs.
 

The provider planned and delivered people’s care and treatment with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.
The provider had worked with people to plan and deliver their care; there was evidence of following the current best practice from The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) around risk assessment and management of pressure ulcers. This included tools such as the Braden Scale to determine level of risk. Although district nurses were involved in managing pressure ulcers, staff we spoke to knew what to look out for to escalate concerns if needed.
Staff we spoke with were aware of how to support people at risk of choking, with details provided in their mobile care application on any modified food or drink consistency in accordance with national guidance. One staff member told us, “There are a few (people) at risk of choking, some you have to stay with as they eat. One has powder to make drinks thicker. It says on the eMAR (medicines record on the mobile care application) how much to use.” Speech and Language Therapy Team (SaLT) assessments were carried out following referrals when people were identified at risk of choking. The provider worked with professionals to implement their guidance.
 

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.
People’s care plans included where other stakeholders had input into their care, such as GP or district nurses. Staff told us they worked together well as a team and contacted external professionals as needed or escalated concerns to management to follow these up. One staff member said about visiting professionals, “Yes, it’s very efficient here. Yes, they report to us or the office.” One professional told us, “In my experience, they (staff) have communicated well and supported individuals appropriately.”
 

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

People’s healthcare needs were identified in their care plans. This included the level of support they needed to maintain good health. Senior staff told us they monitored a percentage of daily care logs to help recognise when people’s needs changed and whether care needed adjusting.
In addition, staff said they would raise any concerns with management if people’s health changed. The service could also communicate with staff via the electronic care planning system, which meant updates and key messages could be shared in real time.
One person told us, “They (staff) do meals for me, and they are always trying to persuade me to eat healthy stuff and not just cereals. [Staff] offer me choices of food.”
Staff had information leaflets available on certain health conditions to aid their knowledge. The registered manager was reviewing condition specific training for Parkinson’s, Multiple Sclerosis and Huntington’s disease to further improve this.
 

The provider routinely monitored people’s care and treatment to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

People’s care plans identified specific goals and outcomes related to their care. Staff were aware of these and how to support people. For example, to maintain a person’s goal of independence staff told us, “I would show them and encourage to do tasks with me. Such as cleaning tasks.” The registered manager told us they would review implementing equipment to be able to monitor people’s vital checks in the future with appropriate staff training. This would help to improve timely, appropriate healthcare and reduce hospital admissions.
 

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care and treatment.
Consent was obtained from people, best interest decisions and evidence of power of attorney were in place when a person lacked capacity. Best interest decisions were properly documented, as well as any decision specific capacity assessments. This helped to ensure the provider was following the correct procedures around gaining consent to care.
There were policies and procedures in place to ensure valid consent to care was obtained. People told us staff sought their consent before delivering care. Some staff had a good knowledge of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and how to practically apply this in their everyday roles. Although other staff had limited knowledge of the MCA, this did not impact people’s experience around consent. The registered manager had received further training in this area and said they would look to improve staff knowledge.