Red House - Care Home

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 as good. At this assessment the rating has remained as 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 continually identify and embed good practice.

Staff described a culture where learning was embedded, including training and lessons learned meetings, supporting improved practice. The service had recently identified the need for bespoke training as they supported people with increasing epilepsy needs. A staff member told us, “It made us aware of different types of seizures and how to respond, with protocols and guidelines.”

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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.

Records showed safeguarding incidents were identified, reported and included in wider analysis of risk and trends. A staff member confirmed, “[I] would definitely report safeguarding concerns.”

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.

Assistive technology, including sensor mats and call bell systems, was used to support people and reduce risks while maintaining independence. However, daily records did not always consistently reflect how some risks, such as eating and drinking, were managed. We discussed this with the registered manager who confirmed further consideration would be given to their current approach.

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

Some aspects of the environment, particularly for people living with advanced dementia, required further development to ensure they were fully supportive of people’s needs. We discussed this with the registered manager who confirmed plans were already in place.

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 worked as a team and demonstrated a good understanding of people’s needs, with systems such as call bell monitoring and task allocation supporting safe care delivery. One staff member explained, “We all work together well.”

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

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.

Regular audits and checks, including stock counts and recording on electronic systems, supported safe medicines management practices. Care plans included detailed guidance on administration, including protocols for medicines taken on an ‘as and when’ basis, and staff monitored effectiveness where required.