Addison Court

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 inadequate. At this assessment the rating has changed to good. This meant people were safe and protected from avoidable harm.

The provider was previously in breach of legal regulation in relation to managing safeguarding, staff recruitment, accidents and incidents learning and medicines management. Improvements were found at this assessment and the provider was no longer in breach of regulation.

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. Accidents and incidents were monitored to see if lessons could be learnt to help keep people safe. One person said, “Any problems I have had have been small, but they listened to me and sorted things out.”

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed and monitored. People and relatives said the service met people’s needs. A relative told us, “I'm so happy with this place.”

People were protected from abuse and told us they felt safe. One person said, “I feel safe and can sleep peacefully without all the worries.” Staff received safeguarding training and said they would immediately report any concerns they had. One member of staff said, “I would take immediate steps to address the issue responsibly. I would ensure (the) immediate safety of the individual involved.” The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately with the relevant agencies.

Risks to people were assessed and plans put in place to keep people safe. One person said, “I know I’m safe here and they look after me really well.” The provider used recognised tools to effectively monitor and address risks to people, for example in relation to pressure damage. Risk assessments were regularly reviewed to ensure people were safe.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. Regular checks of the premises and equipment were carried out to ensure they were safe to use. Plans were in place to support people in emergency situations.

The provider made sure there were enough qualified, skilled and experienced staff. People told us they received safe and timely care. One person said, “I feel safe here because there is always someone to help me.” Staff were safely recruited, and checks were carried out before they started work to reduce the risk of unsuitable staff being employed. Regular training took place to ensure staff had the knowledge and skills needed to provide safe support. One member of staff said, “We always have a strong team of skilled and experienced staff to provide a high standard of care, to ensure that residents feel safe and well cared for.” Staff received effective support, supervision and development. A member of staff we spoke with told us, “Supervisions are very important for the residents wellbeing and ensuring their high-quality care.”

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. The provider had effective infection prevention and control policies and systems in place. Regular cleaning took place, and the premises were clean and tidy when we visited.

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. Medicines were stored securely with access restricted. Room and temperature monitoring was in place and within appropriate ranges. Each person had a front sheet which contained information to help staff identify the person and ensure that medicines were administered to the right person. This included a photo and a list of any allergies alongside any specific information required to support staff administer medicines safely to the individual resident. Medicines were administered as prescribed. Where medicines were to be administered as and when required or at a variable dose, protocols were in place to support the safe use of these medicines. Care plans contained sufficient information to ensure staff could support people with their medicines. One medicine was not being crushed safely. We raised this with the registered manager and senior leaders, and action was taken to ensure this was done safely. Medicines management was audited and any actions identified were completed in a timely manner.