Highwood 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 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. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

There was a clear focus on keeping people safe. Health and social care professionals were referred to for advice, as necessary.

Records showed a proactive culture regarding health and safety incidents or concerns, and these had been effectively reflected upon and used to drive improvement.

Accidents and incidents were monitored for any patterns to aid learning and resulted in changes that improved care for people. For example, involvement of relevant health and social care professionals and additional training for staff.

The provider worked with people and healthcare partners to establish and maintain safe systems of care, in which safety was managed or monitored. They made sure there was continuity of care, including when people moved between different services.

People confirmed they received safe care and support and when appropriate staff liaised with relevant health and social care professionals.

Staff said they were well supported and had enough information to meet people’s needs.

There was clear evidence of appropriate and timely referrals and reviews of people’s care and support. For example, with GPs, community nurses, respiratory nurses, hospice nurses, occupational therapists, older people mental health team (OPMHT) and speech and language therapy team (SALT).

The provider 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. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

People felt safe with the staff that supported them and felt able to raise any concerns.

Staff demonstrated an understanding of what might constitute abuse and knew how to report any concerns they might have. For example, staff knew how to report concerns within the organisation and externally to the local authority, police, and the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

We saw kind and respectful interactions between people and staff during our site visits.

Staff had received safeguarding training, to ensure they had up to date information about the protection of vulnerable people.

The provider demonstrated an understanding of their safeguarding role and responsibilities. They explained the importance of working closely with commissioners, the local authority and relevant health and social care professionals on an on-going basis.

There were clear policies for staff to follow. Staff confirmed they knew about the safeguarding adults’ policy and procedure and where to locate it if needed.

We found the service was working within the principles of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA) and if needed, appropriate legal authorisations were requested to deprive a person of their liberty. Any conditions related to Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) authorisations were being met.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by thinking holistically. Staff provided care to meet people’s needs that was safe, supportive and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

People lived safely and free from unwarranted restrictions because the service assessed, monitored, and managed safety well. People’s individual risks were identified, and the necessary risk assessment reviews were carried out to keep people safe. Risk management considered people’s physical and mental health needs and showed measures to manage risk were as least restrictive as possible.

The service had comprehensive risk assessments covering all aspects of the service and support provided. Care plans contained clear guidance for staff about how to recognise and manage risks, for example, when people were experiencing emotional distress and how to support people with acute health conditions.

Staff were aware of and knew where to find information about people's risks. Staff told us, changes relating to people’s care were communicated to them through several different channels, for example internal messages, handovers, and staff meetings.

Staff were trained to monitor, anticipate, and observe changes in behaviour. This helped them identify if people were unwell or upset and provide the support they needed.

The provider detected and controlled potential risks in the care environment. They made sure equipment, facilities and technology supported the delivery of safe care.

People told us staff helped them feel safe without minimising their independence. They felt able to move freely around the home and spend the day as they wished.

People’s individual needs were met by the adaptation, design, and decoration of the premises. People had a variety of spaces in which they could spend their time, and their bedrooms were personalised. Reasonable adjustments had been made to enable people to move around as independently as possible.

Environmental risk assessments considered all aspects of the home, both internally and externally to ensure people lived freely within a safe environment.

Risks relating to the physical environment had been identified and the necessary remedial actions were completed to ensure people’s safety.

The provider undertook regular health and safety checks of the premises. Safety systems and equipment used at the service were maintained and serviced at regular intervals to make sure these remained in good order and safe for use. A maintenance record was in place and jobs were completed in a timely manner.

Staff confirmed they had received relevant health and safety training, including fire safety, to carry out their roles to ensure the safety of people living in the home.

People had individual personal evacuation plans in place to guide staff in the event of a fire.

The provider 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.

The number and skills of staff matched the individual care and support needs of people using the service. People received support from a consistent staff team. This ensured people were able to build up trusting relationships with staff who knew their needs.

People were proactively supported by staff throughout our site visits. For example, providing personal care, ensuring people were comfortable and engaging in individual activities.

Staff received relevant and good quality training in evidence-based practice. Staff had also completed nationally recognised qualifications in health and social care.

Staff received on-going supervision for them to feel supported in their roles and to identify any future professional development opportunities. Staff confirmed they felt supported by the management team.

The provider used safe and effective recruitment and selection processes to recruit new staff into the service.

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.

Effective infection control measures were in place.

People confirmed that the home was clean and tidy with a homely feel.

Staff wore personal protective equipment appropriately.

Staff were trained in infection control and said there was plenty of equipment to ensure effective infection control.

Equipment was monitored and kept clean. Cleaning charts were up to date, which covered all areas of the home.

Infection control audits were completed on a regular basis to ensure the safety of the layout and hygiene of the premises.

The provider’s infection prevention and control policy was up to date and reflected current good practice guidance.

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.

People confirmed they received their medicines in a timely and safe manner.

Staff followed systems and processes to administer, record and store medicines safely. They made sure people received information about medicines in a way they could understand.

Staff reviewed each person’s medicines regularly to monitor the effects on their health and well-being and provided advice to people about their medicines.

Medicine storage temperatures were monitored; there were suitable storage arrangements including for medicines that required further security. There were regular safety checks for these medicines. Medicines were disposed of safely.

Audits were undertaken to ensure people were receiving their medicines as prescribed. The checks also ensured medicines remained in date.