You are here

Potensial North East Supported Living Good

This service was previously registered at a different address - see old profile

Inspection Summary


Overall summary & rating

Good

Updated 13 April 2018

The inspection took place on 21 and 22 February 2018. The inspection was announced. This is a small supported living scheme and we wanted to be sure that someone would be in when we inspected.

We last inspected Potential Supported living in November 2016, at which time it was rated good. At this inspection we rated the service as good.

This service provides care and support to seven people living in their own homes. As well as four people living in two ‘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.

The service did not have registered manager in post. 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. However there was a deputy manager and a replacement manager was in post and was commencing their registration with us.

People who used the service were confident in the ability of staff to keep them safe. No concerns were raised from people and their relatives.

Care plans were detailed and person-centred. Each contained a one page profile that gave staff relevant information when providing care to people who used the service. ‘Person centred’ means the person receiving care is central in developing their care and their preferences are respected.

Support plans contained person centred risk assessments. These identified risks and described the measures to be taken to ensure people would be protected from the risk of harm. This supported people to do the things they wanted to live their life fully.

Staff were trained in safeguarding and were able to describe types of abuse and what they could do to protect people.

There were sufficient staff to meet people’s needs safely. Spot checks were carried out by the deputy manager to ensure quality and competency of staff.

Consent was documented in people’s care files and people we spoke with confirmed staff asked for their consent on a day to day basis.

People were supported to maintain their independence on a daily basis with living skills and with personal care where appropriate. They had choice and control over their own life from being supported by person centred care approaches.

People were always respected by staff and treated with kindness. We saw staff being respectful, considerate and communicating exceptionally well with people.

People were supported to maintain good health and had access to healthcare professionals and services.

We saw people were supported to prepare meals, eat and drink sufficient amounts to meet their needs and special dietary needs were supported.

Infection control measures were in place for staff to protect people from the risk of infection through, training, cleanliness and protective clothing where required.

Support staff told us they felt supported to carry out their role and to develop further and that the manager was supportive and always approachable.

Medicines were managed and administered safely. We looked at how records were kept and spoke with the deputy manager about how staff were trained to administer medicines and how this was monitored.

We found an effective quality assurance survey took place regularly and we looked at the results. The service delivered had been regularly reviewed through a range of internal and external audits.

We found people who used the service and their representatives were regularly asked for their views about the support through questionnaire and feedback forms.

People and their relatives were able to complain if they wished and were knowledgeable of how to complain or raise minor concerns.

The manager had informed CQC of significant events in a timely way by submitting the required notifications. This meant we could check that appropriate action had been taken.

Inspection areas

Safe

Good

Updated 13 April 2018

This service remains Good.

Effective

Good

Updated 13 April 2018

This service remains Good.

Caring

Good

Updated 13 April 2018

This service remains Good.

Responsive

Good

Updated 13 April 2018

This service remains Good.

Well-led

Good

Updated 13 April 2018

This service remains Good.