The Brocken

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 people were protected from abuse and avoidable harm. This is the first assessment for this registered service. This key question has been rated 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 demonstrated a proactive safety culture rooted in openness and honesty. Staff actively listened to safety concerns, investigated incidents, and reported events. The provider actively identified events that adversely affected service users. Each incident was analysed to implement an action plan, minimising future recurrence and keeping 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. Information was gathered from people, relatives and others involved in their support to understand their individual needs and any risks to their safety. This informed the development of personalised care and risk management plans. This ensured people received safe and appropriate support from the moment they began using the service. The provider demonstrated they worked closely with other professionals.

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 told us they received the training they needed to identify abusive and poor practice and had access to processes for alerting the appropriate authorities if required.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by taking all their needs into account. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them. The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks. Risk assessments had been devised to keep people safe when receiving general support. These were reviewed and up to date. People had been involved in the process of devising risk assessments.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. While responsibility for peoples’ accommodation did not form part of the registration of the service, risk assessments for staff were available relating to each person’s home. These included assessments covering potential environmental hazards. Staff were provided with information on actions to take in people’s homes in case of an emergency.

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.

Staff stated they felt they had plenty of time to travel between each call and to perform their roles in an unhurried manner. Staff were recruited in a safe manner, with appropriate checks made prior to them coming to work at the service.

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. Staff received training in both infection control and food hygiene. People and relatives confirmed staff used personal protective equipment (PPE) when providing support

The provider made sure medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities, and preferences. Information in care plans and the testimony of people indicated they were able to deal with their medicines independently or through the support of a family member or friend. This was promoted by the service. Where staff were involved in the administration of medicines, this was done safely. Staff had received training in medicines awareness and had their competencies checked to do this safely on a periodic basis. One person told us, "They know what they are doing with my medicines and they never miss these."