You are here

Dimensions 2 Buckby Lane Good

The provider of this service changed - see old profile

All reports

Inspection report

Date of Inspection: 18 September 2013
Date of Publication: 19 October 2013
Inspection Report published 19 October 2013 PDF

People should be protected from abuse and staff should respect their human rights (outcome 7)

Meeting this standard

We checked that people who use this service

  • Are protected from abuse, or the risk of abuse, and their human rights are respected and upheld.

How this check was done

We looked at the personal care or treatment records of people who use the service, carried out a visit on 18 September 2013, observed how people were being cared for and checked how people were cared for at each stage of their treatment and care. We talked with people who use the service, talked with staff and reviewed information given to us by the provider.

Our judgement

People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

Reasons for our judgement

People who use the service were protected from the risk of abuse, because the provider had taken reasonable steps to identify the possibility of abuse and prevent abuse from happening.

The provider had a safeguarding policy. A copy of this was on the office notice board, together with the whistle-blowing policy and the General Social Care Council ‘Code of Practice’. The relevant contact numbers for whistle-blowing and safeguarding were also on the notice board. An easy-read version of the safeguarding policy was available to help in explaining this to the people supported. The local authority multi-agency safeguarding policy, procedure and guidelines were also available.

The staff were not using any forms of physical intervention and no Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS) were in place. All of the staff had completed safeguarding training by means of a computer-based e-learning course within the provider’s expected two-yearly cycle. The staff understood their role in reporting any safeguarding-related concerns and referred to the information on the office notice board.

Some concerns related to potential safeguarding had arisen within the previous 12 months which were followed up. No evidence to support the concerns was found.