Archived: The Poplars

Updated 7 March 2017

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 was 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 inspection took place on 9 February 2017. The inspection was unannounced. This inspection was conducted by one inspector.

Before the inspection, the provider completed a Provider Information Return (PIR). This is a form that asks the provider to give some key information about the service, what the service does well and improvements they plan to make. We looked at previous inspection reports and notifications received from the provider. A notification is information about important events which the provider is required to tell us about by law. This ensured we were addressing any areas of concern.

We spoke with two relatives, three care staff, one team coordinator, one community support leader and the director of services. We looked at three people’s care records, four staff files and medicine administration records. We also looked at a range of records relating to the management of the service.

Updated 7 March 2017

We undertook an unannounced inspection of The Poplars on 9 February 2017.

The Poplars is registered to provide accommodation for up to six adults with learning disabilities who require personal care. At the time of the inspection there were three people living at the service.

At the previous inspection on 14 and 15 January 2016 we found the provider had not acted in accordance with the principles of the Mental Capacity act 2005 and associated code of practice. This was a breach of Regulation 11 of the Health and Social Care Act 2008 (Regulated Activities) regulations 2014, which relates to consent.

At this inspection we found that the home had made significant improvements to address the areas of concern. The registered manager and staff understood the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) 2005 and applied its principles in their work. The MCA protects the rights of people who may not be able to make particular decisions themselves.

The service did not have 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. However, the community support leader of the service had submitted an application to become the registered manager.

Staff understood their responsibilities to identify and report all concerns in relation to safeguarding people from abuse. Staff had completed safeguarding training.

The service sought people's views and opinions and acted upon them. Relatives told us they were confident they would be listened to and action would be taken if they raised a concern. Where risks to people had been identified risk assessments were in place and action had been taken to manage the risks. Staff were aware of people's needs and followed guidance to keep them safe.

People received their medicines as prescribed. Records confirmed where people needed support with their medicines, they were supported by staff that had been appropriately trained.

Staff spoke positively about the support they received from the community support leader. Staff had access to effective supervision.

People were supported by staff who had the skills and training to carry out their roles and responsibilities. People benefitted from caring relationships with the staff who had a caring approach to their work. The service had robust recruitment procedures and conducted background checks to ensure staff were suitable for their role.

Staff and the community support leader shared the visions and values of the service and these were embedded within service delivery. The service had systems to assess the quality of the service provided. Learning from audits were used to improve the service.

People were supported to maintain good health. Various health professionals were involved in assessing, planning and evaluating people's care and treatment. People had sufficient to eat and drink. Where people needed assistance with eating and drinking they were supported appropriately.