Fethneys Living Options - Care Home Physical Disabilities

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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has remained requires improvement. This meant some aspects of the service were not always safe and there was limited assurance about safety. There was an increased risk people could be harmed.

We reviewed 3 quality statements under this key question. Whilst improvements have been made, these need to be sustained and embedded, to ensure people’s safety was maintained over time.

This service scored 66 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

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 safely, free from bullying, harassment, abuse, discrimination, avoidable harm and neglect. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

Improvements had been made since the last inspection. Incidents were managed in line with the provider’s safeguarding policy and procedures. One person said, “I would talk to the manager if I did not feel safe or talk to a social worker.” Staff completed safeguarding training. A staff member told us, “Safeguarding is making sure people that we support are safe from harm.” Notifications were sent to the Commission in line with regulatory requirements.

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.

Improvements had been made since the last inspection. People’s risks were identified, assessed and managed well. Monitoring charts which recorded how much people had eaten or drank, were no longer required. No-one needed a modified diet or their fluid intake to be monitored. Where risks had been identified previously in this regard, these no longer posed a threat to people’s wellbeing as their support needs had changed or they no longer lived at the home.

The last manager had set up a system for monitoring people’s food and fluid intake, and this system could be re-instated if people’s needs changed in the future. Care plans included detailed information about people’s risks and how these were managed, which were followed by staff. The manager said, “We update care plans if needs be and have monthly care plan reviews routinely. Any changes staff might notice, then we would need to put in the care plan.”

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.

Staffing rotas showed consistent levels of staffing. Agency staff were rarely needed as the provider had their own bank staff who could be called upon if required. There were 5 care staff on duty in the morning, then 4 in the afternoon. If needed, additional staff could be deployed, for example, if people wanted to go out.

As part of our last assessment, recruitment systems were effective and appropriate checks were made to ensure new staff were safe and suitably qualified to work in a care setting. People had been involved with the recruitment of the new manager and their opinions had been sought. One person confirmed this and added, “The new manager seems fairly able.” Staff completed training related to supporting people with a learning disability/autistic people which was organised by the provider.

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.