Archived: Poppy Court

Updated 31 July 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 checked 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.

This comprehensive inspection took place on 3 and 5 July 2018 and was announced. We told the provider we would be coming so they could arrange for us to visit people who lived at Poppy Court. One inspector visited people who used the service on the 3 July 2018 and two inspectors visited the office on the 5 July 2018 to see the manager and staff; and to review care records and policies and procedures.

Prior to the office visit we reviewed the information we held about the service. We looked at the statutory notifications the service had sent us. A statutory notification is information about important events which the provider is required to send to us by law. We reviewed the ‘Share your experience’ information people who used the service had sent us since the last inspection.

We contacted the local authority commissioners to find out their views of the service provided. Commissioners are people who contract care and support services paid for by the local authority. They had no new information to share with us.

We reviewed information the provider sent us in the Provider Information Return (PIR) during the inspection visit. 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 found the PIR was an accurate reflection of the service.

During our visit on 3 July 2018 we spoke with nine people who used the service, and one relative. During our office visit we spoke with the manager, the registered manager, who was also the provider’s area manager for Poppy Court, a registered manager from another of the providers extra care services, a team leader, and three care staff.

We reviewed four people’s care records to see how their care and support was planned and delivered.

We looked at other records related to people’s care and how the service operated including, medication records, staff recruitment files, staff training records, records of complaints and the provider’s quality assurance audits.

Updated 31 July 2018

This inspection site visit took place on 3 and 5 July 2018 and was announced.

Poppy Court is an ‘extra care’ housing scheme. People live in their own homes where care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate the premises used for extra care housing. We only inspect the service being received by people provided with 'personal care'; help with tasks related to personal hygiene and eating.

Poppy Court provides personal care and support to people within a complex of 48 apartments and 10 bungalows. Not everyone living at Poppy Court received personal care. At the time of our visit 31 people were in receipt of personal care from the provider.

The apartments are arranged over three floors with a lift and stairs to each floor. Staff provide care at pre-arranged times and people have access to call bells for staff to respond whenever additional help is required. People also have access to communal lounges and a dining room.

At our last comprehensive inspection in June 2017 the provider was not meeting all the regulations. We found a breach in Regulation 12, in relation to safe management of medicines, and improvements were required in the key questions ‘is the service’ safe, effective, responsive, and well led. We rated Poppy Court as ‘Requires Improvement’ overall.

We asked the provider to complete an action plan to show what they would do and by when to improve the key questions to at least good. At this inspection we found the provider was no longer in breach of the regulations and the required improvements had been made. We rated the service as Good.

Since the last inspection the registered manager had resigned. 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. Following the resignation of the registered manager, the provider’s area manager for Poppy Court registered as manager on an interim basis, until another registered manager was recruited. A new manager had been employed by the provider in May 2018 and was in the process of registering with us. The new manager supported this inspection and we refer to them as ‘the manager’ within the report.

People received varying levels of personal care and support depending on their needs. Some people only required wellbeing checks or minimal assistance with personal care. Others required assistance with administration of medication, continence care, showering/bathing, nutritional support and with mobility.

People felt safe living at Poppy Court and with the staff that visited them. Staff had completed safeguarding training and understood how to keep people safe from avoidable harm and abuse. Risks to people’s safety were assessed and plans provided guidance for staff about how to reduce known risks. People who required assistance to take their medicines, received these as prescribed by staff who had completed training to do this safely.

People had an assessment completed at the start of their service to make sure staff could meet their care and support needs. Staff received regular training that provided them with the skills and knowledge to support people’s needs and had regular checks on their practice to make sure they continued to support people safely. Recruitment checks were completed on new staff to ensure they were suitable to work with people who used the service. There was enough staff available to allocate all the visits people required and to meet people's needs safely.

People were visited by a team of staff that they knew and who they said were kind and considerate. Staff respected people's privacy and supported people to live independently in their own homes. Staff arrived around the time arranged and stayed long enough to do everything people needed without having to rush.

People's right to make their own decisions about their care were supported by managers and staff who understood the principles of the Mental Capacity Act. Staff respected people’s decisions and gained people’s consent before they provided personal care. When needed, arrangements were in place to support people to have enough to eat and drink and to manage their healthcare needs.

People were provided with care and support which was individual to them. The managers and staff had a good understanding of people’s individual needs and preferences. People’s care and support needs were kept under review and staff responded when there were changes in these needs. People were encouraged to raise concerns and were confident these would be responded to.

Staff were happy in their work and said they received good support from the management team who were always available to give advice. Staff understood their roles and responsibilities and had regular individual meetings and observations of their practice to make sure they carried these out safely.

The management team worked well together and were committed to providing a quality service to people. There were effective and responsive processes for assessing and monitoring the quality of the service. The manager used feedback from people to assist them in making improvements to the service.