We carried out a review of the data available to us about The Poplars 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 The Poplars, you can give feedback on this service.
The Poplars is a ‘care home’. People in care homes receive accommodation and nursing or personal care as single package under one contractual agreement. CQC regulates both the premises and the care provided, and both were looked at during this inspection. The home can accommodate a maximum of six people with learning disabilities and autism spectrum disorder.
At the time of our inspection there were five people living at The Poplars. There are five en-suite bedrooms on the ground and first floors and a one bedroom flat on the second floor. People share a kitchen, living room and conservatory area.
This service also provided care and support to people living in ‘supported living’ settings close by. In supported living, people live in their own home as independently as possible. People’s care and housing are provided under separate contractual agreements. CQC does not regulate premises used for supported living; we looked at people’s personal care and support.
The care service has been developed and designed in line with the values that underpin the Registering the Right Support and other best practice guidance. These values include choice, promotion of independence and inclusion. People with learning disabilities and autism using the service can live as ordinary a life as any citizen.
The service had a registered manager in post. 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.
On our inspection we found that staff had a good awareness of safeguarding procedures, types of abuse and signs to look for, staff felt confident to report and that issues would be investigated.
People’s risks were assessed appropriately with support plans detailed in how people could be supported safely. There were sufficient numbers of suitable staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe. Recruitment procedures were robust and the service had a well-established staff team.
People received their medicines appropriately. Medicines were stored and disposed of safely. More detail was required in people’s care plans about ‘as required (PRN)’ medicines. The home was clean, people’s risks and needs relating to infection control were identified with plans to support people.
Incidents were reported and learning shared. Staff were aware of the need to be open and honest when things go wrong.
People’s needs, choices and preferences were assessed and support plans detailed how people’s needs were met. Staff supported people to manage risks associated with eating and drinking.
Staff were knowledgeable, skilled and had appropriate support and training to provide effective care. People were supported to maintain a healthy diet and to lose weight where needed..
People’s health and wellbeing was promoted, people were supported to access health services such as the GP, optician, dentist etc. Professional advice was sought and adhered to, for example for speech and language therapy.
The premises met the needs of people, there were some cosmetic works needed, however these had been escalated to the provider to create a plan of works required.
Staff had a good understanding of mental capacity. Consent was sought from people to provide support and for access to records.
Staff treated people with compassion and respect. Staff understood people’s emotional needs and care plans identified signs of anxiety and how to best support people.
People were actively involved in developing their support plans, people had maximum choice and freedom in what activities they did and what support they received. Staff recognised people’s abilities and ambitions and celebrated their successes. Staff respected people’s privacy and confidentiality.
People’s care and support was personalised to meet their needs, choices and preferences. People were involved in planning their care and support, and their feedback was actively sought. People in the service were younger adults and the service had not provided any people with end of life care. We recommended the service implement best practice guidance in advance care planning with people.
There was a clear set of values and a culture of “person centred” in the service. Expectations of staff were clear and the registered manager was ‘hands on’ in role-modelling for staff. There was a clear quality assurance process in place which reviewed care plans, daily records of care, medicines and health and safety in the home. The registered manager took action where improvements were required.
People, staff and relatives were involved in planning care and support. Staff were encouraged to try new things and to positive risk take with people to explore new activities. The service worked in partnership with other agencies and commissioners, and worked with charitable organisations to ensure people have access to opportunities.