The Chestnuts

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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

This service scored 72 (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 about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

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.

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.

The provider did not always detect and control potential risks in the care environment. During the assessment, we identified environmental safety concerns which included food items stored beyond their use by date and an item that did not have appropriate date labelling, an unlocked cupboard containing hazardous cleaning products and a fire door propped open. There was no evidence of harm, however this increased the potential risk for people to access hazardous substances or unsuitable food to remain available. Leaders responded appropriately when concerns were highlighted, and they undertook discussions with staff regarding environmental safety responsibilities and reinforced expectations. In relation to the door that was propped open, the provider updated the person’s care plan to outline this behaviour and provided staff with guidance on how to respond safely and consistently.

The provider had systems in place to monitor the safety of the premises and equipment, including regular environmental audits, fire safety checks and health and safety inspections. Leaders maintained oversight and acted upon concerns. Equipment observed during the assessment was appropriately maintained and serviced.

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 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.

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.