We carried out a review of the data available to us about Potters House 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 Potters House, you can give feedback on this service.
We found the following examples of good practice
The provider implemented visiting arrangements that were safe and helped to control and prevent the spread of infections. Visitor protocols included a lateral flow test (LFT) for COVID-19 prior to visits. Visitors were given access to Personal Protective Equipment (PPE), such as face masks to make sure the risk of catching and spreading infections was minimised. Hand sanitiser was available for use at the entrance. Visitors had their temperature taken by staff to check they were not symptomatic of COVID-19.
Visiting professionals were asked to provide evidence of their COVID-19 vaccinations prior to entering the home. All care home staff took a daily LFT test as a precaution to check if they had the virus before starting their work in the supported living service.
The service had enough staff to meet people’s needs. Agency staff were recruited to cover when needed and the provider was able to maintain their assessed staffing levels. At the time of our inspection, we observed there was sufficient staff to support people.
Staff and people took part in a COVID-19 testing programme according to government guidance. All staff had completed relevant training in infection control and PPE. Handwashing guidance was displayed throughout the home and additional PPE was available for staff and visitors. The registered manager carried out infection control audits of all areas within the supported living service in accordance with the provider’s infection control policies. There was a daily cleaning schedule in place to ensure the premises was kept clean and to maintain hygiene, which helped prevent the spread of infections.
The provider kept up to date with government and local guidance on self-isolation, visiting and outbreaks to ensure they were following it correctly.
The service had 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 legal requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and the associated regulations on how the service is managed.
The service was safe. Risks had been identified. Information and processes were in place on how to mitigate risks to ensure people received safe care. Staff were aware of how to identify abuse and knew who to report abuse to, both within and outside the organisation. Medicines were managed safely and people had been receiving their prescribed medicines. Staff told us they had time to provide person centred care and had enough staff to support people. There were systems in place to reduce the risk and spread of infection. Staff had been trained on infection control and knew how to ensure risks of infection were minimised when supporting people. Pre-employment checks had been carried out to make sure staff were suitable to care for people safely.
The service was effective. Staff had received training required to perform their roles effectively. People were cared for by staff who felt supported. Staff had received regular supervisions and told us that they were supported in their role. Staff knew the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and requested people’s consent prior to supporting them. People’s care and support needs were assessed regularly for effective outcomes. The service worked with health professionals to ensure people were in the best of health.
The service was caring. People had a positive relationship with staff. People told us that staff were caring and their privacy and dignity were respected by staff. People were involved with making decisions about their care.
The service was responsive. Care plans were person centred and detailed people’s preferences, interests, communication ability and support needs. People knew how to make complaints and staff were aware of how to manage complaints.
The service was well-led. Regular audits were being carried out. Staff told us the service was well-led. People’s and staff feedback was sought through meetings and surveys.
Further information is in the detailed findings below.