Willow House Residential Home

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 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.

Systems and processes were in place to ensure people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. Staff had received safeguarding training and knew how to report a concern. Oversight of safeguarding was robust and concerns were effectively managed.

Risks to people’s health and safety were robustly assessed, monitored and mitigated.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 safely by staff. For example, we observed staff supporting people to mobilise appropriately. Staff involved people in a discussion about this process throughout. People told us they felt safe. For example, one person told us, “Yes I am safe here.” Relatives told us they were confident their loved ones were safe.

Risks to people were identified and reflected accurately in care records. These were regularly reviewed. Staff knew people’s needs and risks. They involved people and relatives in the risk assessment process. For example, one staff member told us, “We have a meeting with the resident and family to do the risk assessment and discuss things together.”

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 suitably trained staff to meet people's needs without delay.Feedback included, “If [Name] presses the call bell, they come pretty quick,” “I think the [staff] are well trained” and “My [relative] has settled in nicely. I think [they] like being here. The staff all seem helpful. I would give them 10 out of 10.”Staff told us they had time to spend with people. For example, one staff member told us, “We have more time for residents here. We have time to talk to people.”Staff were recruited safely. Systems and processes were in place to ensure staff were supported. Staff told us they felt supported by the manager who was approachable.

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.