L'Arche Bognor Regis

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 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 promoted a positive learning culture where safety was prioritised. Staff felt confident to raise concerns and understood their responsibility to report safety events. Records showed accidents and incidents were reported promptly, and there was manager and provider oversight of these. The manager analysed incident information to identify patterns and trends and used this learning to make improvements. Lessons learned were shared with people and staff. This supported continuous improvement and safer outcomes for people.

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.

A person told us about their experience of planned medical surgery and said staff supported them well throughout the process. Records showed the person was actively involved in planning their treatment, including expressing their preferences and what was important to help them feel informed, prepared, and safe. A multidisciplinary approach was used to ensure the person’s needs and wishes were understood and met. This enabled the person to have a smooth hospital admission and continuity of care.

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.

Records showed safeguarding concerns and other safety issues were reported in a timely manner. People told us they felt safe with the staff supporting them and said they knew how to raise concerns about their safety. A person said, “They are nice and helpful and treat me well.” The provider engaged specialist organisations when there were specific concerns about people’s personal safety. This included ensuring people had access to appropriate resources in an emergency and a point of contact where they felt listened to, supported and reassured. Staff received regular safeguarding training and were knowledgeable about how to recognise and report abuse.

The provider worked with people to understand and manage risks by taking a holistic approach. Staff delivered care that was safe, supportive, and enabled people to do the things that mattered to them.

People were given opportunities to talk about potential risks and how these might affect them. Risk management plans and risk assessments were in place to ensure people received safe care and could continue to enjoy activities safely.

One person who smoked told us they understood the health risks associated with smoking but did not wish to stop. Their risk assessment reflected the impact of smoking on their health. Measures in place considered the safety of the environment and the potential risks to their tenancy if they were to smoke inside their property.

The provider ensured that equipment, facilities, and technology supported the delivery of safe care. People lived in their own homes, and the care provider was not responsible for individuals’ personal equipment or the condition of their home environment. However, the provider made sure staff were trained to recognise potential hazards when working in people’s homes, including risks to their own personal safety and how to report these.

Staff supported people to raise any safety concerns with their landlord and had access to emergency contact numbers for major utility companies.

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.

Safe employment processes protected people from the recruitment of unsuitable staff. Staff received a comprehensive induction which included mandatory training and observed practice. Staff new to care undertook the Care Certificate which is a set of 16 standards that for the basis of training for health and social care support staff in England. People told us there were enough staff to meet their needs and our observations reflected this.

The service supported people with a learning disability and autistic people. Processes were in place to ensure staff training met the requirements of the Oliver McGowan Code of Practice, which sets out the mandatory training standards for staff supporting people with learning disabilities and autistic people.

The provider assessed and managed the risk of infection effectively. They identified and controlled potential sources of infection and shared any concerns promptly with the appropriate agencies. Staff received infection prevention and control (IPC) training and had access to personal protective equipment (PPE). This was used appropriately to minimise the risk of contamination and the spread of infection when supporting people with their personal care needs.

The provider ensured that medicines and treatments were safe and met people’s needs, capacities, and preferences. Staff involved people in planning their medicines, including when changes occurred. People were encouraged to maintain their independence, for example, by removing tablets from their packaging.

A person told us that staff supported them with their medicines at specific times to manage a health condition. Medicines were stored safely in line with guidance, and people received them according to their preferences.

Systems were in place to ensure that people’s behaviour was not controlled by excessive or inappropriate use of medicines. People had regular medicine reviews with prescribers to ensure their prescriptions were current and aligned with the principles of STOMP (Stopping Over-Medication of People with a Learning Disability or Autistic People).