120 Furber Road

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 about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

Systems were in place to capture incidents, accidents and complaints. This included what the concerns were, what action had been taken to minimise further risks and any learning. These were reviewed by the registered manager and by the senior management team to ensure risks had been minimised. This also enabled them to share learning across the organisation where relevant.

Staff were confident to raise concerns about safety and felt they were listened to. Regular meetings were held to share learning and improve practice within the home.

There was evidence of openness and transparency, in line with duty of candour requirements. The registered manager was clear about their responsibilities for reporting to the CQC and the regulatory requirements of their role.

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.

People had detailed health action plans and hospital passports, which included information about their health care needs, communication, and the support they needed on a daily basis. This enabled other agencies to get to know the person and what was important to them.

Staff worked closely with specialists such as psychology, the positive behaviour support team, speech and language therapy and the community learning disability team ensuring people’s health care needs were being met. Health professionals were positive about the service telling us that they were provided with appropriate and timely information to enable them to make decisions on treatment pathways.

People’s needs were assessed before moving to the home. A new person and their family representative were supported to visit the home to meet the staff and the people they were planning to live with. People’s views were sought in respect of the new person, to ensure they were compatible living together. The registered manager and deputy manager had visited the new person in their previous home enabling them to get to know the person.

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 understood their safeguarding responsibilities to ensure people were protected from the risk of abuse. Staff had completed safeguarding training and were confident to escalate issues both within the organisation and with external agencies if needed. A member of staff told us, “I would report any safeguarding concerns immediately.”

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and how they managed DoLS within the service. We found appropriate assessments and applications had been made.

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.

Care plans and risk assessments contained detailed guidance for staff to follow to keep people safe. This included supporting people whilst eating, personal care, supporting with their health care needs and activities both in the home and the community. Staff we spoke with understood risks to people and how to support them to remain safe. A member of staff told us, “Safety is paramount, we ensure the cleaning cupboard is locked at all times, we ensure anyone at the risk of choking's food is well cut and in the right texture, we ensure the medications are correct and update the GP on any new developments.”

Where needed, people had a positive behaviour support plan that described triggers, early warning signs and strategies that people found helpful in reducing their anxiety. This included spending time in a quieter area of the home and opportunities to discuss their concerns or to spend time doing something they enjoyed. During the assessment a person experienced anxiety due to the noise levels within the home. Staff promptly recognised this and redirected the person in a positive way to a quieter part of the home. The staff member supported them with their laundry engaging them in meaningful conversation throughout. The person instantly responded and was more relaxed due to the prompt interactions of the staff member.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

There was a programme of ongoing maintenance, refurbishment and decoration. Some areas of the home were being redecorated such as the hallway and a bedroom. The bedroom was being decorated to accommodate a new person moving to the home and they had been consulted on the colour scheme.

Staff told us a lot of improvements had been made to the home including replacing the kitchen and making the communal areas more homely and comfortable for people. A relative told us, “Since the recent management change they have made the home more homely.” They told us how sound proofing had been used in a bedroom to aid other people in the home to have a good night sleep. Staff confirmed this and said this had been successful enabling other people to have an improved night’s sleep.

Systems were in place to ensure the home was safe. This included checks on equipment, legionella checks, fire and gas appliances. Adaptations such as key codes on the kitchen door and covers on radiators all helped to keep people safe. Where a person was visual impaired sharp edges in their bedroom and lounge area had been covered with soft foam to avoid injury.

Personal emergency evacuation plans were in place for each person. These considered the person’s mobility, health needs and behaviours that might affect how they left the building in an emergency. Staff and people had completed fire drills to ensure people could evacuate the home safely, whilst evaluating the effectiveness of safety equipment and evacuation plans.

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.

Staffing was planned to ensure there were sufficient staff to support people doing the things they wanted to do. Some people had one to one support to enable them to do the things they wanted and to keep them safe. It was evident staffing was kept under review and was being increased to accommodate a new person moving to the home.

People were protected by safe recruitment checks of new staff. These checks included obtaining a full work history, references and a Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) check. DBS provide information about convictions and cautions held on the Police National Computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions.

New staff completed an induction and a probationary period to ensure they were suitable to work in 120 Furber Road. This included shadowing more experience staff. Staff told us, “I completed a full induction and ongoing training to support people safely and confidently” and “Yes I had a comprehensive induction, and I have completed my Level 3 Diploma, which has helped me improve my knowledge and confidence in supporting people safely and effectively”.

Training and supervision sessions were in place for the staff team. This included mandatory training to keep people safe and bespoke training relevant to the needs of the people living in the home. Staff confirmed they had regular supervision and attended training as required.

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. We found the home to be clean and free from odours. Cleaning schedules were in place and the care staff had delegated areas of cleaning to complete to ensure the home was clean and free from odour.Staff had completed infection prevention and control training. Infection prevention and control policies were in place alongside regular audits to ensure policies were adhered to.

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.

People's individual medicines were stored in a secure cabinet in their rooms. This helped staff to provide a more person-centred approach to the administration of people’s medicines. Each person had a medicine profile describing how they wanted to be supported and information about their medicines and any side effects. Electronic medicine records were maintained of all medicines administered. This enabled the registered manager and the provider to monitor medicines remotely. Alerts were sent if medicines were missed meaning staff could rectify this promptly.

Staff received training in medicines management, and their competency was checked before they were authorised to administer medicines. There was a medicines policy in place. There was a process in place to report and investigate medicines errors and incidents. Staff carried out daily medicines checks and medicines were audited as part of the provider's quality monitoring processes to identify gaps and make improvements.

The service ensured people’s behaviour was not controlled by excessive and inappropriate use of medicines. Staff understood and implemented the principles of STOMP (stopping over-medication of people with a learning disability, autism or both) and ensured that people’s medicines were reviewed by prescribers in line with these principles. Annual health reviews were completed to ensure people were receiving medicines appropriately.