Portelet Manor Rest Home

On this page

• Overview
• Shared direction and culture
• Capable, compassionate and inclusive leaders
• Freedom to speak up
• Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion
• Governance, management and sustainability
• Partnerships and communities
• Learning, improvement and innovation

We assessed 3 quality statements in the well-led key question. The scores for these areas have been combined with scores based on the rating from the last assessment, which was good.



Our rating for the well-led key question remains good.



The management team now had oversight of the service, having restructured how service managers and staff were deployed. There were effective systems for assessing, monitoring and improving the quality and safety of the service. These included regular audits of various aspects of care and record keeping, of health and safety, and of how the service was run. Any shortfalls were addressed and put right. The management team notified CQC of significant events, as required in law. This helps CQC monitor the services we regulate.

This service scored 75 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

We did not look at Shared direction and culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

Managers had a compassionate, person-centred approach to their work with people. This was evident in all our observations of them during this assessment and was reflected in feedback from people's families.



The management team had the professional development they needed enabling them to manage Portelet Manor Rest Home safely and effectively. They were in contact with local networks for registered managers. This helped them keep abreast of current good practice.

Managers were prominent in the service, having daily contact with people and staff. Systems and processes were in place to support positive relationships between managers, staff and people using the service.

The provider’s approach to staff retention and development had enabled the promotion of a member of staff to a senior role within the service.

We did not look at Freedom to speak up during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

We did not look at Workforce equality, diversity and inclusion during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

The management team had reorganised, improving their oversight of the service, which was housed in 2 buildings connected by a central corridor. A service manager in each building took responsibility for care in that building. This enabled closer oversight of the safety and effectiveness of people's care, as well as enabling the managers to function as a 'fresh pair of eyes' when alternating between buildings.

One of the service managers had applied to register with CQC. An additional vacant post was being covered temporarily by a senior manager. The new post holder was due to start work soon after this assessment ended.

Staff were now allocated to work within 1 half of the building, rather than across the whole home. The managers had observed that staff seemed more comfortable with this approach, with a clearer understanding of their roles and what was expected of them.

There were now effective systems for assessing, monitoring and improving the quality and safety of the service. These included regular audits of various aspects of care and record keeping, of health and safety, and of how the service was run. The management team addressed and put right any shortfalls.



The service now consistently notified CQC of significant events such as safeguarding adults referrals, as the law requires.

We did not look at Partnerships and communities during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Well-led.

The managers were enthusiastic and knowledgeable about dementia care. They explained how staff worked skilfully with people, which avoided the need for restrictive care in people’s best interests. Managers provided examples of how they and the staff supported people in a flexible way based on what they needed at the time.

One of the managers had trained as a dysphagia (swallowing difficulties) practitioner. She had studied this to reduce the impact for people of waiting for a swallowing assessment from a speech and language therapist.



The managers communicated openly and sensitively with people and their families if something was wrong, for example, when people became unwell or there was an accident.

Staff now had annual training in key areas. This was staggered at 6 monthly intervals, so staff were not away training all at once. This included face-to-face training in topics including fire safety and moving and handling. The management team kept a training tracker, enabling them to see what training was due when and for whom.

There was a process for the management team to review accidents, incidents, safeguarding and complaints for developing trends that suggested further learning and changes were needed.