Willowbeck Health Care Limited

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. Lessons were learnt to ensure risk was mitigated and good practice implemented.

We found the management team were open and transparent and wanted to drive improvement at the service. Accidents and incidents were reviewed and analysed to identify themes and trends. Where necessary, root cause analysis had been completed to identify triggers and potential causes to support the lessons learned process. A specific lessons learned document was completed for accidents and incidents. Feedback to the staff team about lessons learned was provided through team meetings, communications and discussions.

We asked the provider to review their quality systems to ensure that lessons learnt from recent incidents were embedded and sustained across the service.

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.

Assessments were completed prior to a person moving in to support a smooth transition. These included detailed information on how the person wanted to be supported, information from health professionals and agreement on outcomes/goals.

Electronic care plans allowed people’s information to be shared more easily with other professionals to enable them to access the most effective care and support.
Partners were positive of the relationship they had with Willowbeck. One told us “Partnership working with Willowbeck has been very good.”

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.

People and their relatives told us they felt safe and received safe care. One person told us, “I get looked after. I feel safe. It’s because there are always people around.” A relative commented, “Yes [person] is safe.”

Staff had completed safeguarding training and the provider’s safeguarding policy guided staff about different types of abuse and how to raise a concern to ensure people were protected. One staff told us, “I would feel comfortable reporting issues, managers are willing to listen."
 

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.

Risks to people had been assessed and risk assessments were in place to ensure people’s safety. Care plans contained detailed information regarding people’s needs and how to support them in areas such as mobility, personal care or distressed behaviour. Regular reviews took place to make sure records were up to date and accurate.

Staff knew people well and understood when people required support to reduce the risk of avoidable harm. They told us they were informed if there had been any changes to people’s risk assessments or care plans. Risk assessments were detailed and effectively assisted staff to safely mitigate risks.
 

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

People and their relatives were positive about the environment. One person commented, “Room is nice. Good that I have an ensuite.”

Staff had received training in safe working practices and followed best practices guidance. They felt safe working at the service and had access to all the appropriate equipment they needed. There were effective systems in place to ensure the environment was maintained safely and staff understood their responsibilities in relation to environmental safety.

We observed the home to be clean, tidy and secure. Equipment was well-maintained which supported staff to deliver safe and effective care.

Records were maintained for all servicing and checks within the home. Management conducted regular environmental audits which were effective in identifying issues. The provider had policies in place for maintaining health and safety within the service.
 

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.

Recruitment procedures were in place, so people were cared for by suitable staff who had been assessed as safe to work with people. However, employment histories were not always completed in full and where the second reference for a person was a character reference a record of reference request to a previous care employer was not recorded. The provider agreed to address this immediately.

The provider used a system for determining staffing numbers, which was based on people’s needs. Staff rotas were compiled in line with this information. Although we noted no concerns with staffing levels during our visits, staff and people told us they would like more staff. One staff commented, “Numbers of staff is sometimes a concern. People don’t wait long for their needs to be met but we do feel busy.” We asked the provider to keep staffing levels under review to ensure people were appropriately supported.

Staff confirmed they received an induction, training and regular checks on competency as well as supervision. Records we saw supported this. Staff were positive about the training and supervision they received. One staff told us, “The training is good. I started seeing care work differently when I came due to the training. The training relates to the people we support.”

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.

We found the home to be clean, with infection prevention and control (IPC) processes in place. We observed housekeeping staff on each unit and checklists and records were in place to evidence good cleaning practice. On our first visit we noted malodours across the day on some units, but none were apparent on our second visit. The provider agreed to monitor this.

People were positive about maintenance of the home . One person said, “Yes it’s clean and tidy.”

Staff had received infection control training and staff were observed to use appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) for tasks they carried out.
 

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.

During the inspection we noted stock levels to be correct and medicines, including thickener, were stored safely and securely. However, on one unit where several people required thickener for their drinks, we noted only one tin was in the locked kitchen cupboard. We asked the provider to monitor to ensure that where people required thickener in their drinks that staff only dispensed the thickener prescribed for the individual, and that it wasn’t utilised for other people.

People that had Parkinson’s disease had their time critical medicines given on time which is vital for the management of their condition.

One resident was encouraged to keep their independence by ordering their own over the counter medicines. The GP was included in this decision and measures were in place to ensure they were receiving these medicines safely alongside prescribed medicines.

GPs were also included in decisions around when to give residents their medicines ‘covertly’, hidden in food or drink. Regular reviews were taking place to ensure information was still current and up to date.

Monthly audits were carried out and action plans were in place to improve processes such as patch rotation charts. Care plans had good amount of information to show how residents’ complex needs were being managed by staff involved with their care.