Barnet Supported Living Service

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.

Lessons learnt following accidents and incidents were identified to promote good practice. For example, there was a process in place for recording and reporting accidents and incidents. The events were analysed to look for themes and trends and lessons to learn. Lessons learnt were shared across the staff team to help reduce further occurrences.

Opportunities for learning and reflective practice were actively sought throughout the service. There was clear system for reporting incidents which were individually reviewed with detailed feedback provided to staff to identify learning and how they could work together to keep people safe. There was a strong focus on using incidents as an opportunity to identify where people may have support needs that were not being met, and how the service could respond to them.

The provider collaborated with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care and staff worked well together and shared relevant information with other professionals involved in people’s care and support, such as dietitians and speech and language therapists.

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.

Staff we spoke to could confidently describe potential signs of abuse and how they would report these. They were knowledgeable about the whistleblowing policy and how they would raise a safeguarding alert if they felt people remained at risk of abuse and appropriate action had not been taken.

A person using the service told us,” I feel safe and am very well looked after.”

The provider had appropriate policies and procedures in place and staff understood their responsibility to safeguard people from avoidable harm.

Staff assessed risks to people’s safety and developed comprehensive plans about how to reduce those risks. This included risks at the service and in the community. Where appropriate, people had positive behaviour support plans in place which guided staff about how to support people’s individual needs. Staff were mindful of supporting people to develop skills and independence, whilst balancing any risks to their safety, for example, in relation to meal preparation. Relatives felt confident that their family members were kept safe while using the service, and that staff understood and effectively managed any risks.

Accident and incident analysis ensured that robust reflection took place, and any actions could be clearly identified.

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.

A relative told us “The carers are lovely and speak to me on the phone. They let me speak to her on the phone for as long as she wants, they didn’t at her last place.”

Safe recruitment practices were in place to ensure suitable staff were employed at the service. This included checking their identity, their right to work in the UK, undertaking criminal records checks, obtaining references from previous employers and completing value-based interviews.

Staffing levels were adjusted according to the needs of the people using the service. Staff worked on a rotational basis providing 24-hour support to people who use the service. All staff felt there were sufficient staff on duty to enable them to adequately support people. One staff member told us, “Yes, staffing levels are appropriate for the people we support. And additional support is arranged when people’s needs change.”

Staff completed training courses to ensure their knowledge and skills stayed up to date. This included training the provider considered mandatory for the role as well as additional training staff were interested in or was specific to the care people received. Staff received regular supervision and annual appraisals to review their performance

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.