SummerView

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. 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. The registered manager had systems in place for staff to follow, this included health and safety checks in the environment. Safety was discussed with people during meetings this included raising their awareness on safeguarding and fire safety. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice. Staff recorded incidents and accidents and took learning from these to keep people safe.

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. Before people came to live at the service a full assessment of their needs was completed to ensure they could be met at the service. People had the opportunity to visit the service and build relationships with staff before they transitioned to the service. Staff ensured people had access to healthcare and each person had a health passport in place to keep information on their health needs in one place to allow smooth access to services.

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. Staff had received training in safeguarding people and ‘whistle blowing’ and felt confident to safeguard people and raise concerns. One member of staff said, “If any abuse happened, I must report to my manager, then escalate if not addressed. I would go to local authority safeguarding team; there is a policy and website for us to follow.” Another member of staff said, “Safeguarding is about protecting people from abuse or harm and making the environment safe for them.”
The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately. The registered manager raised any safeguarding concerns with the local authority and worked with them to investigate these fully to keep people safe. Safeguarding notifications were raised to the CQC appropriately by the provider.
 

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. People were involved in discussing their care plans and how they could be empowered to safely manage risks to them. Staff had guidance to follow in the form of risk assessments and care plans to keep people safe. Staff encouraged people to make decisions around their safety to promote their independence and support their wellbeing. A relative told us, “We recently had discussions about fire safety and evacuation.” When people communicated their needs, emotions or distress, they were consistently supported, and staff managed this in a positive way that protected their rights and dignity. Appropriate strategies were used to minimise the need for restrictive interventions. Staff supported people to make decisions about their care and activities including accessing the community safely to follow their interests and hobbies.

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 registered manager had audits in place to monitor the environment to ensure this was safe for people to live. Staff had training in fire safety and fire drills were undertaken at the service. Each person had a personal emergency evacuation plan in place which showed what support people would need in the event of an evacuation. Where staff practiced fire evacuation with people, they were able to tailor their personal evacuation plan to show how they reacted during fire drills and what additional support they may require.
Fire risk assessments had been completed at the service and where issues had been identified the provider was arranging to address these. Safety certificates were in place for gas safety, electrical wiring and legionella testing. Staff monitored hot water checks and hazardous substances were stored securely.
The provider had spent time over the last year refurbishing the external and internal environments to make the building safe and a conducive environment for people to live. People had been given the opportunity to make decisions about the redecoration and how they wanted their individual rooms to be personalised.
 

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. People were supported by a consistent staff team and had a key worker to provide individual support. Staff knew people well and were able to describe how they liked to be supported. A person told us who their keyworker was and proceeded to give them a hug.
The provider recruited staff safely, applicants provided a full working history, provided references and undertook a disclosure and disbarring check (DBS), to ensure they were suitable to work with vulnerable people. New staff underwent 2 interviews before they commenced work. The first interview was held at head office and the second interview at the service. This gave people an opportunity to meet potential new staff and an opportunity for the registered manager to observe how new staff interacted with people.
New staff were given a full induction to the service including completing relevant training. One member of staff said, “During my induction I read policies and completed eLearning, I then did shadow shifts and had an opportunity to get to know people.”
The registered manager had a system in place to monitor staff training and provided face to face training in the form of master classes for certain subjects. Where needed, training was repeated yearly and staff competencies were checked.
Staff were being provided with regular supervision to discuss their performance, and any training needs or support they may need. The registered manager was holding regular staff meetings, from minutes of meetings, we saw staff discussed the general running of the service, any lessons learned, policies and processes as well as people they were supporting.
 

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. Infection protection control practices had improved at the service. Staff had received training in infection prevention control (IPC) and safe food handling. Personal protective equipment (PPE) was available for staff to use when needed. The provider had policies in place to support IPC practices at the service. Cleaning schedules were in place along with regular audits to monitor the service. We observed the environment was clean and free from any odours.

The provider made sure that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. Staff had received training in medicine management and had their competency to support people with medicines checked. The registered manager understood the principles of STOMP (stop over medication of people with a learning disability, autism or both). People living at the service had reviews of their medication with the appropriate healthcare professional to ensure this met their needs.
Medication documentation we reviewed was in good order and included clear directions for medicine prescribed as and when required (PRN).