Ashlong Cottage

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 continually identify and embed good practice.

There was a process in place to monitor incidents and accidents. Staff were required to complete incident forms, which were reviewed by management to ensure appropriate actions were taken to maintain people’s safety and prevent recurrence. Relevant agencies and healthcare professionals were notified as required to provide oversight and additional support where necessary.

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.

A care needs assessment was completed prior to individuals being referred to the service. The provider ensured that prospective residents were compatible with existing occupants before agreeing to any new admissions. Transitions into the service were carefully managed in line with a structured transition plan. The move-in process was tailored to each individual, taking into account their preferences and choices, and included settling-in visits to support a smooth and positive adjustment.

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. People appeared happy living at the home. Conversation with one person highlighted their positive experience of the care and support they received from the service. People appeared relaxed in the presence of staff and were willing to engage with visitors.

A monthly safeguarding matrix was used to monitor and track all safeguarding concerns, including the dates they were raised and their outcomes. We saw appropriate action being taken in response to a safeguarding concern being raised, helping to ensure people remained safe and protected from the risk of harm.

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 care plans were personalised and reflected their individual needs and preferences. They included risk assessments covering key areas such as nutrition, mobility, access to the community, and overall wellbeing.

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

At the last inspection, an improvement was identified relating to the storage of harmful substances. During this inspection, it was observed that no harmful substances were left unattended. The Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) cupboard was found to be securely locked.

However, we noted that information displayed outside the main entrance for visitors appeared outdated, including COVID-related guidance. Prompt action was taken by the Registered Manager, who removed the information on the same day of our visit.

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 were provided with the necessary support to carry out their roles effectively. Training covered areas relevant to their responsibilities, including understanding people’s health conditions, communication needs, and behaviours that may challenge. Systems and processes were in place to ensure that staff received regular supervisions, appraisals, and competency assessments, including random observations of practice, to ensure care was delivered in a dignified manner and in line with good practice.

Pre-employment checks were in place and included Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) checks and the obtaining of references prior to staff commencing employment. DBS checks provide information about convictions and cautions held on the Police National Computer, helping employers make safer recruitment decisions.

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 had access to the provider’s infection control policy, which outlined procedures for the safe handling of sharps and spillages, the use of protective clothing, and appropriate handwashing techniques. This ensured that staff were provided with clear guidance on how to control the risk of infection when supporting people with personal care.

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.

People received appropriate support with their medicines. Medication Administration Records (MAR) charts were fully completed and signed, including the individual’s name and the quantity of medication administered. ‘As required’ (PRN) protocols were in place, providing clear guidance on dosage, when the medicines should be used, and potential side effects. Medicines were stored securely in locked cabinets within a locked room. People were assessed to determine whether they were able to safely self-administer their medicines.