Ruskin Lodge

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.

The provider had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Staff listened to concerns and reported incidents to management, who investigated them. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. Staff described a culture where they felt comfortable raising concerns with management and were confident any issues would be promptly addressed by the manager. Regular team meetings followed a structured agenda and were used to reflect on practice, share learning, and agree actions to improve safety. A member of staff told us, “We work together well as a team,” which reflected the strong sense of collaboration observed between staff members and management during the assessment.

The provider worked 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, including when people moved between different services. The provider had safe and effective systems in place to manage care, particularly in the context of short-term respite stays. A robust reassessment process was in place for each admission, ensuring any changes in health or care needs were identified and addressed promptly. Care plans were thorough, detailed, and person-centred, supporting continuity and consistency in care. The provider was in the process of changing from a paper based to an online care planning system. One staff member told us, “The new online care plans should streamline the assessment process and help with care delivery.”

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 demonstrated a clear understanding of their safeguarding responsibilities and had completed training to recognise and respond to all forms of abuse. Staff were able to describe the different types of abuse and knew how to report any concerns appropriately. One staff member told us, “Yes, I know when to escalate a concern.” People told us they felt safe and well cared for, with comments such as, “Very safe indeed” and “Oh yes, never felt safer.”

Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. The provider worked closely with people to assess and manage risks in a way that considered their individual needs and preferences. Staff members were observed engaging with people to understand their personal goals and what was important to them, which helped tailor care to their needs and supported safe risk management. Risk assessments were tailored to each person, with clear plans in place to support them in taking part in activities that mattered to them, while also minimising potential risks. A staff member told us, “The residents are what matter.”

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. The environment was free from hazards, with fire doors clearly signed and unobstructed. Fire instructions, including zone details, were prominently displayed in the reception area. An emergency grab bag, containing essential items needed in case of an evacuation, was available in reception alongside a copy of each person’s Personal Emergency Evacuation Plan (PEEP). PEEPs were reviewed and updated prior to each stay. The garden area was accessible to people, and it was observed that individuals were able to use it independently. One person told us, “They [staff] treat me like a queen and make sure I’m 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.

We observed sufficient staff on duty with staff reporting staffing levels and skill mix were appropriate and met people’s needs. Regular use of familiar bank and agency staff ensured continuity and safe staffing levels when permanent staff were not available to cover gaps in the rota. All staff spoken with felt adequately trained and supported. They spoke positively about the registered manager and team leaders. Staff confirmed they received regular 1-1 supervisions and annual appraisals, as documented in their records. People told us there was always enough staff on duty and expressed confidence in their abilities, with comments such as, “Always around when you need them,” “Nothing is too much trouble, they come at the drop of a hat” and “Never wait too long for them to come when I use my bell.”

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. The provider maintained a good stock of personal protective equipment (PPE) throughout the home, with clear infection prevention and control (IPC) and PPE guidance displayed, including instructions on proper hand-washing techniques. The home was clean and hygienic, and people consistently told us the environment was well-maintained. People’s comments included, “Spotless throughout” and “My room is cleaned every day.” Cleaning products were kept securely in locked cupboards when not in use. Staff had completed all required training.

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 securely in cabinets. The medication room was clean, tidy, and well-organised. Up-to-date medication policies and guidance were available. Trained staff were responsible for managing all medications, including booking medicines into the home, and ensuring accurate records were maintained. Staff members responsible for medicines management had completed relevant training. Room and medication fridge temperatures were monitored and recorded daily. Protocols for ‘as needed’ medications for three people contained good detail. Medication administration records were maintained, and body maps were used to identify sites for patches, creams, and ointments. A risk assessment was completed for people who self-medicated. People told us they received their medicines on time, with comments like, “Oh yes, they are like clockwork, never miss” and “Always get them on time.” We observed staff administering medicines to two people in a respectful manner, explaining the medication, offering a drink, and staying with them until the medicines were taken.