Portland College

Updated 26 June 2018

We carried out this inspection under Section 60 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 as part of our regulatory functions. This inspection was planned to check whether the provider is meeting the legal requirements and regulations associated with the Health and Social Care Act 2008, to look at the overall quality of the service, and to provide a rating for the service under the Care Act 2014.

Our inspection was unannounced and the team consisted of two inspectors, a specialist advisor and two experts by experience. An expert by experience is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service. A specialist advisor is a professional who has expertise in a specific area. Our specialist was a nurse.

We checked the information we held about the service and the provider. This included notifications that the provider had sent to us about incidents at the service and information that we had received from the public. We used this information to formulate our inspection plan.

We also used information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return. This is information we require providers to send us at least once annually to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make.

We spoke with nine people who used the service. Some people were unable to tell us their experience of their life in the college, so we observed how the staff interacted with them in communal areas.

We also spoke with ten members of care staff, two nurses, the quality lead, the principal and the registered manager.

We looked at the care records for four people to see if they were accurate and up to date. In addition we looked at audits completed by the college in relation to incidents and safeguarding referrals. . We also looked at quality audits and staff competency assessments. We looked at these to consider how the service was continuously monitored and reviewed to drive improvement. After the inspection we asked the provider to send us some additional information on their infection control audit, meetings with people and relatives and additional capacity assessments and training records.

The registered manager sent these to us within the required timeframe.

Updated 26 June 2018

The inspection took place on 16 May 2018 and was unannounced. At the last inspection we rated the college overall as ‘Good.’ At this inspection we found that the effective section required some improvements.

Portland College is an Independent Specialist College of further education. The College provides educational opportunities for learners and a range of independent living activities complimented by residential placements for people with a disabilty in transition or who may require respite or short stay.

Portland College has 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 requirements in the Health and Social Care Act 2008 and associated Regulations about how the service is run.

We have made a recommendation in relation to the capacity assessments being completed and how they link into individuals care plans. People were supported to have maximum choice and control of their lives and staff supported them in the least restrictive way possible; the policies and systems in the service supported this practice. Staff ensured they obtained consent before providing care.

The environment did not always meet people’s needs to provide them with the facilities to support independence or personal choice. People enjoyed the meals, however wanted to be involved in developing the menus to provide healthier options. We saw this was planned to take place. Some areas of the care provided was not always communicated to ensure people received effective care.

People’s care was delivered by staff who had established positive relationships with people. The care was respectful and ensured people’s dignity was considered at all times. When required health care professionals had been consulted about ongoing or emerging health needs.

The college worked with a range of partners and encouraged people to be part of the service development and improvements. People could access a range of activities and develop their interest in different hobbies or consider aspects of training to support a career.

People were cared for by staff who understood how to keep them safe from harm. Any risks had been assessed and measures put in place to reduce the risk and guidance provided by health care professionals. There was sufficient staff to meet people’s needs and these were reflected of different settings and needs. Medicine was managed safety. When incidents had occurred lessons had been learnt and changes made. The college ensured that people were protected from the risk of infection and the required checks were in place.

Care plans were comprehensive and detailed all aspects of people’s lives. This included their preferences, any equality requirements or accessible needs in relation to communication and information.

The registered manager and provider worked to the required regulations. We saw the rating was displayed at the college and on the website. Notifications had been sent to us to recognise when incidents had occurred, so that we could reflect on any actions taken. Complaints had been responded to in line with the policy and provided the complainant with an apology and outcome.