Humberston House Care Home

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.

This is the first assessment for this newly registered service. This key question has been rated 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 and registered manager fostered a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and honesty. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice which mitigated risks. Accidents and incidents had been appropriately responded to and communicated to people’s relatives. People's relatives told us staff knew what to do and they were informed following any accidents or incidents. A relative said, "I always get a call if there are any issues.”

Staff appropriately reported accidents and incidents which the management team closely monitored. This included looking for patterns and trends which were used to learn lessons and were shared with staff to make ongoing, positive changes to the service, which reduced the risk of incidents happening again.

The management team worked closely with people, healthcare professionals and local services to ensure people could access the services they needed to maintain their safety and wellbeing. Systems were in place to ensure referrals were made when needed and important information was shared with healthcare professionals. For example, staff printed out information about people’s health and care needs for them to take to their medical appointments.

Staff had effective, positive working relationships with healthcare professionals which promoted people's wellbeing and safety. A healthcare professional said, "I would recommend it because of the safety. I know when a person is here, I can ask [staff] to observe them, and there is always a positive response. So, I know they are in safe hands."

The management team used the provider's admissions process to gather information about people's needs. This was used to create individualised care plans and risk assessments, which guided staff how to support people. The management team worked with other services and appropriately shared information when people wanted to move into or out of the service, and promoted continuity of care.

The management team 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. Safeguarding concerns were shared quickly and appropriately.

People were kept safe. One person said, "I do feel safe here, yes." People's relatives told us, "They're very safe” and "There are no issues, I wouldn’t want her to be anywhere else, she is completely safe." Staff had the skills and knowledge to identify and report safeguarding concerns. Safeguarding concerns had been appropriately reported to relevant professionals, and action taken to safeguard people.

Safeguarding concerns were responded to positively. Staff and most people's relatives told us they could go to senior staff or the management team with any concerns and were confident they would be acted upon. A safeguarding ambassador was in place to help complete referrals and support their colleagues with identifying safeguarding concerns.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment when this is in their best interests and legally authorised under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). In care services this is usually through MCA application procedures called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS). We checked whether the service was working within the principles of the MCA and whether proper legal authorisations were in place when needed to deprive a person of their liberty. Applications were appropriately made to deprive people of their liberty, with people’s care plans updated following authorisations and to reflect any associated conditions. The registered manager monitored DoLS, to ensure new authorisations were applied for in a timely manner.

The management team worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking about people as a whole. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

People were empowered to consider how they could keep themselves safe whilst continuing to do activities or tasks that were important to them. Staff equipped people with the relevant information, and documentation was in place to support this. For example, some people wished to manage their medicines independently. Detailed risk assessments and care plans were in place to enable people to do this safely.

Staff provided support, advice and guidance to keep people safe. We observed staff supporting people safely with transfers, which included a staff member showing a person how to use their mobility frame more effectively when transferring into a chair, helping to mitigate the risk of falls.

The management team detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care. The safety of the building and equipment was maintained through the completion of regular checks, maintenance and servicing. Relatives told us, "The home is secure" and "It’s a safe environment."

Effective fire safety systems were in place. Personal Emergency Evacuation Plans (PEEPs) were in place for people to receive appropriate support in an emergency. We found 2 PEEPs required updating following recent changes to people’s needs and fed this back to the registered manager. Staff were trained in fire safety and regular fire drills were held to ensure staff had the skills and knowledge to support people in an emergency situation.

The registered manager 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.

Staffing levels were safe. People and staff were positive about staffing levels. Although, we received mixed feedback from people's relatives. The management team regularly monitored and adjusted staffing levels which had enabled staff to provide care in a timely manner.

Staff were very positive about team work at the service and the support they received from the management team, which included the management team providing hands on care every day. A staff member told us, "[Nominated Individual] who is here today. We were once short [staffed] and he helped me on the floor. He rolled up his sleeves and got stuck in – ‘Don’t worry we will get it sorted’ he said."

Systems were in place to ensure the safe recruitment of staff. There was ongoing recruitment to ensure sufficient staff were available as the service became busier.

Staff received appropriate support for their roles. All staff were supported by robust induction processes which included shadowing and buddy support. Staff received regular training, in-depth supervision and annual appraisals in line with the provider's policies.

The management team assessed and managed the risk of infection. They detected and controlled the risk of it spreading and shared concerns with appropriate agencies promptly.

Most areas of the service were clean and fresh. Staff regularly cleaned the service and robust cleaning processes were in place. We identified a couple of chairs which were not fully clean. We raised this with the registered manager who reviewed and amended cleaning schedules for furniture during the assessment to ensure they remained effective.

Staff were trained in infection prevention and control and understood isolation processes in the event of an infection outbreak.

The management team monitored infections within the service to identify any patterns and trends, allowing them to take appropriate action at the earliest opportunity.

The management team 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’s medicines were administered safely by trained and knowledgeable staff. We found some medicines were out of stock as they were awaiting delivery later that day. Where medicines were not delivered, staff did all they could to resolve the issue promptly and people had not come to any harm. Protocols were in place which informed staff when and how to administer 'as and when required' medicines.

People were included in their care planning for managing their medicines with their wishes and needs being considered. Most people’s relatives told us staff had regular discussions with them about their loved one’s medicines, and they received appropriate support. Where people managed their medicines independently, staff continued to monitor people’s medicines and their ability to take them independently to ensure they remained safe doing so.