Mellor House

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.When an incident or accident occurred the registered manager and provider had systems in place to fully investigate these. There was a learning culture at the service and learning was shared to prevent further accident and incidents. The registered manager was transparent and understood their role under duty of candour. Where safety incidents had occurred, the registered manager raised these incidents with the appropriate authorities such as the local authority to investigate safeguarding concerns. The registered manager shared information with families when appropriate as part of investigating concerns. Where lessons were learned these were shared with all relevant people involved including families. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. Staff were provided with guidance and additional learning where needed to prevent accident or incidents from happening again. A relative told us. “The management was very open and approachable in dealing with 2 main concerns we had.”

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 registered manager worked with people and those close to them to establish their plan of care and had comprehensive individual transition plans, in place, prior to the person moving between services. This approach helped to eliminate any risks and to ensure the person received continuity of care. Part of the transition included shadowing the person’s current care team to observe how care was being provided and how their needs were being met safely. Slow transitions to the service were put in place so that people could spend time at the service getting to know their new environment and staff before they moved in permanently. This gave staff an opportunity to work with them, their families and other healthcare professionals to ensure they could meet their needs safely. A health professional told us, “I have always found the support staff extremely responsive, caring and open to support and advice in the best interests of their service users.” Staff told us communication at the service was good, and they had extra meetings to discuss how to support people before they came to the service.

Each person living at the service had a hospital passport which contained information about their care and support needs, communication style, health concerns, likes and dislikes. The hospital passport can be used to support them when attending healthcare appointments or if they had an unscheduled hospital admission.

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 had received training in safeguarding and knew how to protect people from abuse. Staff were confident they could raise concerns, and these would be taken seriously by the management and provider. Staff were empowered to raise concerns through the provider’s ‘whistle blowing’ process called ‘speak out safely’. The registered manager told us if a concern was raised an independent investigation would be completed by the provider. The registered manager was proactive in raising safeguarding concerns with the local authority and providing information to them to investigate these promptly to keep people safe.

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 recognised that many everyday activities people engage in carry risks, but they need to do them as safely and sensible as possible. This meant they still empowered people with activities but took steps to mitigate the risks. The registered manager was passionate that people should be supported to access activities they enjoyed whilst taking a proportionate approach to the risks involved. For example, where 2 people enjoyed more adrenalin filled activities like Go Karting, the registered manager sourced how they could experience this whilst mitigating the risks for the activity as safely as possible. A health professional told us, “Staff are really innovative in how they approach activities for the people they support, with a very ‘can do’ attitude.”

Where people needed specialist equipment other health professionals such as occupational therapist or speech and language therapists (SALT) were involved in training staff on how to use the equipment safely. A health professional said, “Staff are very knowledgeable about the people they support; they are good at giving feedback and seeking further advice from me as needed.” The registered manager involved families in planning and mitigating risks to ensure staff had all the correct guidance they needed to support people safely.

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. The provider had robust recruitment practices in place including checking applicants provided a full working history, previous job references and undertook a disclosure and disbarring check (DBS). DBS provide information including details about convictions and cautions held on the Police National Computer. The information helps employers make safer recruitment decisions. New staff completed training including the care certificate and shadowed more experienced staff whilst they developed their skills. One member of staff told us, “I have completed face to face training and online training. I have spent time shadowing and observing other staff to get to know people’s communication styles.” Staff told us they had regular meetings and supervision and felt supported by the management team. Another member of staff said, “We have meetings to discuss any concerns, team working and respect, any areas that need improving. Everyone is given an opportunity to raise concerns and talk about people’s care needs.”

The registered manager told us they were recruiting new staff due to some staffing changes and in the interim staff worked additional shifts or an agency was used. The registered manager checked agency staff training was up to date and could meet the needs of the service before they were used. Where possible they used the same consistent agency staff who were supported by regular staff.

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.