Stuart 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 requires improvement. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

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.

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.

Incidents relating to safety were reported appropriately. Systems were in place to share learning from incidents with staff to minimise and prevent any re-occurrence.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. However, they did not always make sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

For example, one person who had recently moved into the service did not have all aspects of their care fully recorded, which meant staff were not aware of some of their preferences. We discussed this with the registered manager who took immediate action to rectify these omissions.

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’s behaviour was monitored and on the whole, support was provided when necessary. However, not all instances were recorded. This meant there was a potential risk to people, because their behaviour may not have always been appropriately managed.

Risks relating to people were assessed and managed appropriately. Staff told us the registered manager supported and encouraged positive risk taking. People were supported in ways which were balanced and proportionate.

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’s behaviour was monitored and on the whole, support was provided when necessary. However, not all instances were recorded. This meant there was a potential risk to people, because their behaviour may not have always been appropriately managed.

Risks relating to people were assessed and managed appropriately. Staff told us the registered manager supported and encouraged positive risk taking. People were supported in ways which were balanced and proportionate.

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 service identified and made improvements to the environment to make sure it was suitable for people’s needs. and areas for further improvements had been identified. Communal areas had been decorated with art that people had created. People’s rooms were personalised to suit their tastes, needs and preferences.

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.

Cleaning staff were knowledgeable about how to minimise the risk of infection. Staff wore PPE appropriately. Robust cleaning processes and checks were in place. The home was clean and odour-free.

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.

Cleaning staff were knowledgeable about how to minimise the risk of infection. Staff wore PPE appropriately. Robust cleaning processes and checks were in place. The home was clean and odour-free.

The provider made sure medicines were safe and met people’s needs, capacities and preferences. However, the provider did not always make sure that medicines were safely administered when people were prescribed some ‘as and when’ medicines.

For example, people who were prescribed ‘as and when’ medicines to support their presenting behaviours due to dementia, did not have adequate reasons for their administration. There was no monitoring of the effectiveness of these medicines to support reviews. We discussed this with the registered manager who took immediate action to rectify this and make appropriate arrangements for how these are managed. The provider confirmed, following our inspection visit, that further plans were being developed to enhance their processes in this area.