You are here

Archived: Low Fauld

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 5 August 2013
Date of Publication: 20 September 2013
Inspection Report published 20 September 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 5 August 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 and talked with staff.

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

The people we spoke with told us that they felt safe and were comfortable approaching staff with any concerns. One person told us, “Its all right here, I feel safe here.” And another said, “I feel very safe, you can talk to staff.”

Some people in the home occasionally needed physical restraint to keep themselves and others from harm. We saw that staff were skilled at managing challenging behaviours and employed strategies to minimise risk and the need to use restraint or place other restrictions on people. We were given the policies and procedures for the use of restraint within the service. The restraint training model, based around the principles of a non-physical intervention, was fully accredited and up to date. All staff were trained in this method to an advanced level, with regular updates.

Staff placed an emphasis on using restraint as the last resort and used positive management plans to reduce the need for restraint. We saw evidence of how the use of restraint was monitored, and this confirmed the low level of restraint used on people. Any increases to the figures were analysed and fed into lessons learnt from these incidents to reduce any future reoccurrences.

People’s mental capacity had been assessed, to ensure they were not subject to inappropriate restrictions. Restraint was being monitored and used appropriately; ensuring it was kept to a minimum. This meant that people were in receipt of safe and effective care that met their needs.

Senior staff provided us with a copy of the local adult safeguarding policy and procedures used by the service. These were detailed and gave staff the necessary information to carry out the procedures correctly. We spoke in-depth with two members of staff who were both aware of the local area safeguarding policy and procedures. They were clear on the necessity to report to social services who would then lead any investigations. Staff also had a sound understanding of whistle blowing procedures. They were able to explain to us what they would do if they needed to use these procedures to raise concerns or to make a safeguarding referral. When interviewed staff were also clear about the signs and symptoms of abuse and they said they had regular training updates. We saw that appropriate training and systems were in place so that staff acted and responded appropriately to protect people’s rights and welfare.

When interviewed staff were aware of their responsibilities in relation to safeguarding. They were aware of the action to take if there was any suspicion of alleged abuse. Staff told us about the on call procedure which was in place should staff need support when managers were not at the service. We saw that appropriate referrals were being made for investigation to the local social work team. These were also reported to us, CQC as required by legislation.

The manager told us that systems were in place to both prevent and identify abuse. This included internal monitoring that the organisation undertook, by for example looking at all daily notes to ensure no safeguarding issues had been missed, and by data analysis of incidents.