Astor Lodge

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 the last inspection we rated this key question good. At this inspection 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.

We did not look at Learning culture during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

We did not look at Safe systems, pathways and transitions during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The staff team worked with people and healthcare partners to understand what being safe meant to them and the best way to achieve that. Staff protected people’s right to live safely and shared concerns appropriately. People felt safe, and staff understood safeguarding procedures and took appropriate action following incidents. The management team had developed a positive learning culture, which supported prompt responses to safeguarding concerns.

People can only be deprived of their liberty to receive care and treatment with appropriate legal authority. In care homes, this can be done through a procedure called the Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS), which is part of the Mental Capacity Act 2005 (MCA). People who used the service had capacity and had agreed to their stay so did not need to be subject to DoLS.

Staff worked with people to understand and manage risks in a way that supported their recovery and independence. Risk assessments were in place and helped staff identify and reduce risks. People told us staff understood their needs and knew how to support them safely. Staff worked effectively in partnership with the local NHS Trust healthcare professionals throughout people’s stays. This helped people to recover and achieve the best possible outcomes. Visiting professionals and those working at the service were very positive about the staff team and their knowledge of people. A professional said, “We have found the staff at the home are always focused on enabling people to make a good recovery and really support our work.”

We did not look at Safe environments during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

The provider made sure there were enough suitably skilled and experienced staff to meet people’s needs. The recruitment practices met requirements. The management team had reviewed staffing arrangements and determined that 2 nurses were needed on each shift. They also regularly checked whether care staffing levels met people’s needs and the requirements of the local NHS trust. The trust provided support from 3 physiotherapists, 3 occupational therapists, a technical instructor and 2 nurse practitioners, alongside further clinical oversight. These staff worked every day at the service. Staff received mandatory and a range of other training, including an extensive range of training provided by the local NHS Trust, and regular supervision that they found supportive and helpful. People said staff were knowledgeable and available when needed.

We did not look at Infection prevention and control during this assessment. The score for this quality statement is based on the previous rating for Safe.

Medicinesstorage was clean, tidy and well-organised.Temperature monitoring was completed appropriately for the fridge and medicines storage room. Record-keeping for controlled drugs complied with requirements.

Staff worked closely with occupational therapists, physiotherapists and nurse practitioners from the local NHS Trust, as well as a local GP. Staff were knowledgeable about processes and procedures enabling medicines to be managed safely. Medicines-related training was up to date. Staff also had the opportunity to participate in training provided by the local NHS Trust.

Medication-related audits were completed monthly but had lacked detail. The management team had taken action to address this issue. Staff were able to describe issues that had occurred and the learning that had taken place afterwards. For example, missed doses of medicines due to lack of stock had been identified as an area of concern by the provider. Staff had attended meetings with their usual pharmacy, the local NHS Trust and GP practice to discuss contributing factors and identify solutions. Since then, a reduction in the number of missed doses had been observed.

Staff were adept at managing the constant change of people and ensured medicines were always available. They also worked closely with the local NHS equipment teams to ensure items such as Oxygen were supplied in a timely manner.