Grosvenor 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 requires improvement At this assessment the rating has changed to good. Good: This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm. At our last inspection we found the provider was in breach of legal regulation in relation to safe care and treatment. At this inspection, enough improvements had been made, and the provider was no longer in breach of legal regulation.

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.The home had good effective systems in place and had a good oversight of any accidents and incidents that occurred. Changes were made to people’s care to mitigate risk going forward and the home reported them accordingly. Staff told us: "We do our best to learn from any incidents and accidents, we want to keep people safe at all times. I know what to do if there is an accident and who I need to tell."

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 home carried out pre-admission assessments to ensure they could meet people’s needs before they moved into the home. Staff told us: “We assess people before they come into the home. We get information from them, their family and any other professionals involved. We have a good relationship with health professionals.” The management team told us how they monitor people’s needs and adapt the care they provide, such as getting specialist equipment in like a rise and recliner chair or a hoist to try to support with transfers. If people’s needs increased too high for the home to provide safe care, they had supported the family and ensured the person had a smooth transition into a more suitable home.

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 appropriate safeguarding training and demonstrated awareness of how to safeguard people and the types of abuse they might face. Details of safeguarding and what this means were displayed around the service. Staff were seen to be protecting people from abuse and harm. One person told us: “I feel very safe here as the staff are so lovely and accommodating. I can’t stop singing their praises!”

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. There were relevant risk assessments in people’s care plans and staff were observed supporting people to take positive risks safely. Staff told us: “People have to be able to take risks. Sometimes staff try and do everything for people, but we remind them that they need to still be able to do things for themselves, even if that is risky as it maintains their independence.”

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 home had the appropriate equipment in place that people might need and this was well maintained. The home had a good oversight of any maintenance work and carried this out promptly. Staff told us: “Maintenance is done regularly, we report any problems, and it’s usually fixed straight away.”

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. One relative told us: “I generally couldn't be happier, there is plenty of staff on, they are all very friendly and it is always a calm atmosphere.” Staff told us: “I think we have enough staff. I mean you can’t do anything if people call in sick, but when that happens, we usually cover any absence between ourselves. We are pretty flexible. This means people get good continuity of staff.”

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.Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) was available around the home and staff were observed using PPE appropriately. Staff told us: “We have had training around infection control, it’s common sense really, but we all make sure we are doing it properly as it is important. There is always PPE available, I’ve never seen a time that we don’t have PPE.”

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. Policy and procedure documents were in place and medicine risk assessments were in people’s care plans. Staff had the necessary medicine training, and their competency was checked. Staff told us: “I have had training around medicines, the system is easy to follow, and we check all the time that we are doing things properly. I can ask anytime about anything to do with medicines and the registered manager will help me.”