You are here

Options Roxby House Outstanding

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 10 July 2013
Date of Publication: 13 August 2013
Inspection Report published 13 August 2013 PDF

People should be protected from abuse and staff should respect their human rights (outcome 7)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are protected from abuse, or the risk of abuse, and their human rights are respected and upheld.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 10 July 2013, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service, talked with carers and / or family members, talked with staff and talked with commissioners of services.

We were supported on this inspection by an expert-by-experience. This is a person who has personal experience of using or caring for someone who uses this type of care service.

Our judgement

People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

Reasons for our judgement

People who used the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening. The provider responded appropriately to any allegation of abuse and people were protected against the risk of unlawful or excessive control or restraint because the provider had made suitable arrangements.

People we spoke with said they felt safe in the service. They told us they would, "Talk to staff" and "Tell my keyworker" if they had a problem.

The provider had a safeguarding policy in place which appeared to be aligned with the local authority's guidance. We reviewed information from the local authority which confirmed that there were no safeguarding concerns current at the time of our visit.

The provider organisation submitted monthly safeguarding reports to the local authority. The provider responded appropriately to any allegation of abuse. Staff we spoke with were prepared to use the provider's whistle blowing policy if the circumstances called for this course of action.

Staff also had the opportunity to voice any concerns through the organisations ’cause of concern’ document, which they could use to report any concerns they had about any aspect of the service and care delivery.

We looked at the incidents and saw how they were recorded, reported and analysed. Each person had individual risk management plans in place and these identified the level and likelihood of the risk occurring. We also saw that following incidents a de brief took place with the person who used the service and any staff members involved.

There was a multi-disciplinary team on site that included a psychologist and a speech and language therapist. A consultant psychiatrist also visited on a regular basis. There was evidence in place that confirmed incidents were discussed and action was taken to address the risk of the behaviour re occurring.

Staff attended training in safeguarding adults and received regular updates of this. When we spoke to staff they were able to describe how they would respond in situations involving abuse or suspected abuse, so that people were safe.

The Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards were only used when it was considered to be in the person's best interest. Arrangements were in place to complete assessments of capacity for people who found it difficult to make an informed choice.

We saw evidence in the case files belonging to people who used the service that their rights had been protected. The manager told us," We assess people using the mental capacity assessment and if it is deemed the person does not have capacity to make a decision, a best interests meeting would be held".

The training manager told us that all staff received training on physical interventions when they started work at the service and that this was updated on an annual basis. The form of physical intervention used is British Institute of learning Disabilities (BILD) accredited. Staff told us they try and diffuse the situation and use 'talk down' or diversion techniques first. We were told physical intervention would only be used as a last resort.