You are here

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 6 May 2014
Date of Publication: 26 June 2014
Inspection Report published 26 June 2014 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 6 May 2014, observed how people were being cared for and talked with carers and / or family members. We talked with staff, reviewed information sent to us by other authorities and talked with other authorities.

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

Of the relatives who completed the annual survey, they had all said that they felt people were safe at the service. A relative that we spoke with said that they believed that people were safe there. Staff told us that they protected people’s dignity by always knocking on their bedroom doors before entering and following the protocols they had been taught. For example, staff respected people's personal possessions and did not use them.

We talked to staff about how they safeguarded vulnerable people using the service from abuse. Staff had a good understanding of the topic and knew about different types of abuse and how to protect people from it. All of the staff said they had received update training about safeguarding and we saw records that confirmed that this training had taken place at two yearly intervals. The staff that spoke with us were able to identify the different types of potential abuse and the signs that might lead them to suspect it. This included changes in behaviour and unexplained injury. A nurse told us that knowing people well helped them to notice changes.

Staff that we spoke with said that if they witnessed abuse they would intervene and report it to their line manager. Equally, if they were to suspect abuse they would report it immediately. None of the staff had ever witnessed or suspected any abuse in the home. Staff could locate an up to date policy about safeguarding vulnerable adults from abuse which included the contact details for the local authority. We also saw that information about whistleblowing was readily available for all staff. This showed us that the service had a policy for preventing, detecting and acting re-abuse of vulnerable adults, and that staff knew about it.

When we visited the home, no deprivation of liberty standards (DOLS) were in place, however they had been in the past. This had not involved physical restraint. The manager told us, and we saw evidence that an application to the Court of Protection had recently been made. This had followed a best interest meeting with staff and members of the social services safeguarding team in order to determine a decision on the long term protection of a person who used the service. This showed us that the policy of the service was followed in practise in the best interests of people using the service.