St Ann's Lodge 2

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. At our last assessment we rated this key question good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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 were safe at the service. There was a warm, open culture at the service in which people were comfortable and at ease with each other and with the staff team. One person told us, “Yes, I’m safe here. The staff are looking after me…I would talk to the staff here as I trust them if I was worried about something. If someone is upsetting me, they (staff) help me and make sure they don’t do that.” A relative said, “I think [family member’s] safe there. [Family member] is in the right place. They keep a good eye on them and make sure [family member] doesn’t come to any harm.”

Staff understood their duty to safeguard people. A staff member told us, “We have to keep people safe from abuse, neglect or any kind of harm. I would report any concerns to managers. They would for sure do something about it.” Managers understood their responsibility to make timely referrals to the relevant agencies when a safeguarding concern was raised and to work proactively with partners to ensure people were safeguarded from further risk.

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

People were supported to stay safe whilst doing the things that mattered to them. One person told us, “They (staff) come with me when I go out and look after me.” A relative said, “[Family member] wouldn’t go out without staff, but he’s kept safe.”

Staff understood risks posed to people and were provided with current information and guidance on how these should be managed to keep people safe from harm. A staff member told us, “I refer to the care plan and risk assessments. It tells you how to keep people safe at home or when they are going out and how we can keep them safe from things that can harm them.”

Managers reviewed people’s care records and risk management plans at regular intervals to make sure these were continuing to support people to stay safe.

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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.

There were enough staff to meet people’s needs. One person told us, “There is always someone around to help.” Staff were present, available and provided care and support to people when they needed this. Staff were observant when people were moving around and worked well together to make sure people remained safe at all times.

Changes to staffing were handled well by managers to reduce the impact of these on people and their routines. A relative said, “There have been recent staff changes but [family member’s] coped with that well…I was worried but they did really well with the change.”

Staff received regular and relevant training and were supported to continuously learn and improve in their roles through supervision and appraisal of their work performance. One person told us, “They’re well trained.”

There were safe recruitment practices at the service. The provider carried out the necessary checks required on staff that applied to work at the service, to make sure they were suitable to support people.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Medicines optimisation during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.