Nimrod House Supported Living

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 had a proactive and positive culture of safety, based on openness and transparency. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Audits completed by managers and senior leaders were robust and effective in identifying areas for improvement and opportunities to embed and develop good practice.

Findings from audits undertaken by managers were discussed within the management and wider staff team to share learning and improve practice. The provider also used their systems to collect a wide range of views from different groups, including people, their families and professionals, using the information to enhance the quality of service they offered.

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.

Comprehensive, up to date assessments were in place for people which identified people’s care and support needs. People’s needs, preferences and wishes were clearly documented in their care plans. People were involved in the development of their plans, and the provider sought the views of families and professionals to help ensure care and support reflected people’s individual needs and preferences.

The provider worked effectively, with people and relevant professionals to help ensure people’s safety within their home environments. We observed adaptations in place within a person’s flat which reduced the risk of injury and supported them to remain safe.

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 told us they felt safe living in the service. They were clear about who they were able to contact if they had any concerns. A person we spoke with told us, “I would talk to staff if I was scared but I’m OK now.”

Staff received training about safeguarding and were knowledgeable about the types of abuse they might encounter and the methods they would need to report it. They knew they had to report concerns in the first instance to their manager and were able to tell us about other professional bodies such as the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and the local authority who they would also need to report to.

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 had person centred risk assessments in place which encompassed all aspects of their lives, both in their homes and within their community. People were involved in developing their risk assessments as much as possible and staff used their extensive knowledge of the people and the views of families to ensure risks were comprehensively assessed.

Staff understood the importance of positive risk taking and explained how they balanced people’s safety with their right to remain as independent as possible. A staff member told us, “I have worked with [person] for a long time, so I know them really well, I know what the risks are,. [person] is constantly learning new things which could mean there are new risks. When this happens, we talk about it and it becomes part of their overall risk assessment.”

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

The provider had assessed risks relating to each person’s flats. Hazardous substances, including cleaning products were stored safely in locked cupboards and equipment used within each person’s living environment had been appropriately risk assessed. The managers were working proactively with their senior leaders to review environments to ensure they remained safe and met an agreeable standard of décor.Staff worked alongside other professionals to review people’s living environments and had found positive, workable solutions to keep people safe in their homes.

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 provider had a clear, robust recruitment processes in place. This meant staff were recruited in line with current legislation which included for example, references from previous employers and criminal records checks.

The staff team was well established and received regular, refresher training to keep their knowledge and skills up to date with current legislation. Staff had completed mandatory training and additional specialist training relevant to supporting people with learning disabilities and autistic people.

A staff member told us, I have been here quite a while. I came from another service the provider has. I was invited to come and try it to see if people here liked me and wanted me to support them. I was able to shadow other staff and learn how to offer people the support they wanted.”

The staff we spoke with told us they felt confident in being able to talk to either the management in the home or anyone within the wider provider organisation if they had any concerns.

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.

People’s flats were well maintained and visibly hygienic. There were cleaning procedures in place and the people we spoke with told us how they were involved in keeping their flats clean and tidy which helped maintain a safe and pleasant environment. Staff had access to appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE), which supported the prevention and control of infections.

The provider had infection control policies and procedures in place. This provided guidance to staff on the associated risks of infectious diseases, measures to reduce the risk of transmission and the steps staff should take in the event of a breakout.

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.

Each person had their own storage cabinet in their flats which were locked. Staff held the keys for safe keeping which helped to ensure people’s safety.

The provider had effective systems in place which supported the safe administration of medicines. There were systems in the service which included the receipt, storage administration and the monitoring of medicines. Daily checks were undertaken to provide oversight, ensuring medicines were administered safely as prescribed.

Staff were trained in all aspects of medicine management and were routinely assessed regularly to ensure they remained safe and effective in their administration of medicines. Procedures were aligned with current best practice which helped to ensure people received their medicines safely and consistently.