Vision Day Support

On this page

• Overview
• Learning culture
• Safe systems, pathways and transitions
• Safeguarding
• Involving people to manage risks
• Safe environments
• Safe and effective staffing
• Infection prevention and control
• Medicines optimisation

Safe – this means we looked for evidence that people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

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.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. Accident and incident logs were in place, ensuring all events were recorded and reviewed. There was a service improvement plan, with actions implemented and monitored to reduce risks and improve outcomes.

Staff were encouraged to discuss incidents openly and honestly through team meetings and reflective practice. This created a positive culture where learning was shared, and improvements made to enhance the safety and quality of support for people.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. Transitions into the service were well planned and person-centred. A relative said, “It was a good transition,” describing a carefully planned period of visits and information sharing before their loved one moved into their home. Pre-admission assessments were completed to understand individual needs, risks, preferences and outcomes. There was effective coordination with external services, including hospitals, GPs, dentists and other healthcare professionals. Information was shared appropriately to maintain continuity of care, and individuals were supported to access the services they need.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff concentrated on improving people’s lives while protecting their right to live in safety, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

People and their relatives were confident that staff protected their well-being and respected their rights. A person told us they felt "very safe” because staff always helped them. A relative said, “[Loved one] is 100% safe.” Staff demonstrated good knowledge of safeguarding procedures and understood how to recognise and respond to potential concerns. They were aware of their responsibilities to follow appropriate reporting processes to ensure people were protected from harm.

Community Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (c-DoLS) are legal authorisations for depriving a person of their liberty in supported living or other community settings. Managers and staff understood when c-DoLS authorisations would need to be sought and what to do if there were conditions imposed.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided support to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

Up-to-date risk assessments were in place, regularly reviewed and tailored to each person’s needs. Assessments set out the support required to reduce risks while maintaining people’s independence. Risks were managed in the least restrictive way, balancing safety with individuals’ rights and preferences. Staff were knowledgeable about individual risks and confident in supporting people while encouraging positive risk-taking.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the supported environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

The service worked with landlords to ensure people’s homes were safe, well-maintained and suitable for their needs. Managers carried out regular checks and prompt action supported the ongoing safety and comfort of the living environment. People and staff understood fire safety processes and supported people to stay safe within their own homes.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified,skilled and experienced staff, who received effective support, supervision and development. They worked together well to provide safe care that met people’s individual needs. Rotas were well managed, and there were enough staff employed to provide consistency and continuity of support.

Staff received comprehensive training relevant to their roles, including mandatory and service-specific training. Training was kept up to date and regularly refreshed, ensuring staff had the skills and knowledge required to support people safely and effectively. Some relatives were also involved in training staff to meet their loved one’s specific needs. Ongoing supervision, team meetings, and learning opportunities further supported staff development.

New staff were recruited using safer recruitment practices, including appropriate checks to ensure they were suitable to work with people. Checks included employment history, previous employment references and confirmation of identity.

Relatives were unanimously confident in staffing arrangements. One relative told us, “As far as I am concerned, the staff know [loved one] very well. They are knowledgeable. There are enough staff at all times.”

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

Regular infection prevention and control (IPC) audits were completed, and any identified shortfalls were promptly addressed. People’s personal space and shared areas were seen to be clean, tidy and well-maintained, supporting a safe and hygienic environment. People were fully involved in IPC practices, with staff providing appropriate support and guidance. This included encouraging good hygiene, such as regular hand washing. A person described how they managed their laundry. The process they described showed they were supported to understand the principles of good IPC practice.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff involved people in planning, including when changes happened.

Medicines were stored, managed and administered in line with good practice guidance. Staff received appropriate training in medicines administration and showed a clear understanding of their responsibilities. They were also aware of STOMP principles (Stopping Over-Medication of People with a Learning Disability, Autism or both) and supported people to have their medicines reviewed where appropriate.

People were encouraged and supported to be as independent as possible with their medicines. This included involving them in decision-making and promoting understanding, while ensuring the right level of support was in place to keep them safe. One person had been supported to manage their own medicines with staff support decreasing as their skills developed. Another person was provided with a name stamp so they were able to be more involved with administration of their medicines.