Stallcombe House

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 service 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.

Staff demonstrated an understanding of what might constitute abuse and knew how to report any concerns they might have. Staff had received safeguarding training, to ensure they had up to date information about the protection of vulnerable people. The provider demonstrated a clear understanding of their safeguarding role and responsibilities.

The service had clear policies for staff to follow. Staff confirmed that they knew about the safeguarding adults’ policy and procedure and where to locate it if needed.

We found the service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act (2005) (MCA) and if needed, legal authorisations were requested to deprive a person of their liberty. Any conditions related to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisations were being met.

The service 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.

The service worked in partnership with people to understand and manage risks. Information was provided in an accessible format according to their individual communication needs. This meant people could participate meaningfully in assessing risks and developing support plans. It created a positive culture where people could participate safely in a range of activities of their choosing.

Staff were trained to monitor, anticipate, and observe changes in behaviour. This helped them identify if people were unwell or upset and provide the support they needed.

People lived safely and free from unwarranted restrictions because the service assessed, monitored, and managed safety well.

Risk management considered people’s physical and mental health needs and showed measures to manage risk were as least restrictive as possible.

The service had comprehensive risk assessments covering all aspects of the service and support provided. Support plans contained clear guidance for staff about how to recognise and manage risks, for example, when people were experiencing emotional distress.

Staff frequently monitored and reviewed people’s support plans and records. This meant any issues or improvements needed were identified and communicated to staff promptly.

People were referred for support from external health professionals when staff identified this need.

The management team monitored accidents and incidents for any patterns to aid learning. This resulted in changes that improved care for people.

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 service 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.

The number and skills of staff matched the individual care and support needs of people using the service. People received support from a consistent staff team. This ensured people were able to build up trusting relationships with staff who knew their needs.

People were proactively supported by staff throughout our site visits. For example, accessing the community and engaging in individual activities.

Staff received relevant and good quality training in evidence-based practice. This included training in the wide range of strengths and impairments people with a learning disability and or autistic people may have, mental health needs, communication tools and positive behaviour support. Staff had also completed nationally recognised qualifications in health and social care, including the Care Certificate, which encouraged them to provide safe, compassionate care.

A professional commented, “Stallcombe House has trained staff who are able to identify risks promptly, seek support from relevant professionals with genuine compassion and dedication to their service users.”

Staff received on-going supervision for them to feel supported in their roles and to identify any future professional development opportunities. Staff confirmed they felt supported by the management team.

The provider used safe and effective recruitment and selection processes to recruit new staff into the service.

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.