Denville Hall

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.

The last rating for this key question was good. At this assessment the rating has remained 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 supported staff to learn from things that went wrong. The registered manager investigated all accidents, incidents and complaints. They shared learning from these with staff. Changes were made to the service when needed or staff received extra guidance or training. The registered manager apologised to people when things went wrong. They provided an explanation of their actions and the outcome of investigations to people and their representatives.

Staff supported people to have safe transitions between services. The registered manager assessed people’s needs before they moved to the service. They supported them to visit and spend time there before their move, if this is what they wanted. Staff shared information with other professionals to make sure people’s needs could be understood by others.

The provider had procedures to safeguard people from abuse. Staff undertook training to understand these. Staff were able to explain how they would recognise and report abuse. The registered manager worked with the local safeguarding authority and other organisations to investigate, respond to and learn from allegations of abuse. They took appropriate action to help protect people from further harm.

The provider requested legal authorisations where restrictions amounted to a deprivation of liberty for people who did not have the capacity to consent to these. Decisions about people’s care were made in their best interests and for their safety.

People using the service and their relatives felt they were safe and protected from abuse. They felt confident speaking up if they had any concerns about their care.

Staff assessed and planned for risks to people’s safety and wellbeing. People, and/or their representatives, were involved in planning their own care. Staff discussed risks with people, and they were supported to make informed choices and take risks when appropriate. Risk management plans included information about people’s health needs and the activities they liked to take part in. Staff supported people to find the least restrictive ways to manage risks. When needed, staff liaised with external professionals to make sure people had the right equipment or support. Risk assessments and management plans were regularly reviewed and updated.

People told us they felt safely cared for. A person commented, “It is a remarkable feeling, being so well looked after and safe.”

Staff undertook training to understand how to support people to move safely. We saw staff using appropriate techniques and helping people to be independent when possible.

People lived in a safe and well-maintained environment. Staff completed checks on the safety of the environment and equipment. When problems were identified, these were addressed. There were regular checks on fire safety and systems to help people safely evacuate in the event of a fire.

The environment was appropriately decorated and furnished. There were many different communal rooms with different purposes and functions. These were well equipped. For example, an extensive library, film collection and musical instruments. People using the service explained how they liked these different areas and access to the equipment they wanted and needed.

There was a unit for people living with the experience of dementia. This had been designed in line with best practice guidance for dementia friendly environments and allowed people to feel comfortable and safe.

There were large well-kept grounds which people told us they enjoyed accessing.

The provider employed enough staff to meet people’s needs and keep them safe. There was a low turnover of staff and people told us they knew the staff well. People’s comments included, “They are all lively staff, and we are happy” and “The staff know just how to help me.”

The provider had systems to ensure only suitable staff were recruited. These included a range of checks, an induction and assessments of staff competencies and skills.

Staff felt well supported. They told us they enjoyed working at the service. They had access to a range of training, supervision and guidance. Staff told us they were proud to work at the service.

The provider had systems to help prevent and control infections. Staff completed training about these. People living at the service told us the service was kept clean. We saw staff cleaning throughout the day. Managers undertook audits of cleanliness.

There were good systems to ensure kitchen hygiene and food standards.

Staff were able to access personal protective equipment (PPE) when needed.

Staff ensured people received their medicines safely and as prescribed. Staff worked closely with doctors and other healthcare professionals to make sure people’s medicines were regularly reviewed. Nurses and senior staff completed training to understand about the safe management of medicines. Managers assessed their skills and competencies in this area.

There were appropriate records of medicines management and administration. Medicines were safely stored. There were regular audits and checks of medicines.

People were able to manage their own medicines if they wanted and were able to do so safely. Staff assessed this and helped plan ways to mitigate risks. Some people were prescribed medicines to be taken as required (PRN). The provider had created clear protocols to make sure these were only given when needed. Some people were given medicines covertly (without their knowledge). Staff had involved a team of other professionals to make sure this was appropriate and safe.

People told us they had the support they needed with medicines. Visiting doctors confirmed medicines were well managed. Staff were knowledgeable about people’s medicines needs.