Grove Place Retirement Village

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 honesty. Staff listened to concerns about safety and investigated and reported safety events. Lessons were learnt to continually identify and embed good practice.

People knew who to raise any concerns with and felt able to do so. Staff told us how and where they recorded any incidents which management then reviewed, to identify and make any required improvements. The provider ensured the causes of medication errors had been investigated and relevant actions taken, to reduce the risk of repetition. The registered manager informed relevant parties of the outcomes into investigations under their Duty of Candour as required. Staff confirmed learning from incidents was then shared with them.

Partner agencies told us the registered manager was very open and transparent, and sought guidance about any concerns which had the potential to cause any harm to 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.

The registered manager provided a range of examples of how they worked jointly with external services such as the mental health team, occupational therapy service and the continence service to ensure people’s identified care needs were referred to health professionals promptly. Partner agencies confirmed the registered manager worked closely with them to ensure people’s safety. They told us staff were very knowledgeable about risks to people and how to manage them, whilst also working in close collaboration with them.

The provider had processes in place to ensure relevant information about people’s care needs and their medications could be shared in the event people needed to be admitted to hospital. The registered manager liaised with hospital staff in readiness for people's discharge. Staff confirmed they were then updated about any changes to people’s 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. The provider shared concerns quickly and appropriately.

People told us they felt very safe with staff and we saw people were relaxed in their company. Staff had completed safeguarding training in relation to both adults and children and understood both how to monitor people for signs of abuse and how to escalate any concerns. Staff told us as they knew people well and that they ‘noticed any changes in them.’

The registered manager had taken the correct actions to safeguard people and informed relevant parties of any concerns and the outcomes of these. Leaders understood their legal responsibilities in relation to the submission of statutory notifications to the Care Quality Commission (CQC).

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.

Staff consulted with people about how they wanted assessed risks to them to be managed. People's care plans identified potential risks to them such as from falls and skin damage and detailed how these risks were to be mitigated. We saw people were sat on pressure relieving cushions where required to protect their skin. People had any equipment they needed either to mobilise themselves, or to be transferred safely by staff.

Staff said people's care plans and risk assessments gave them enough guidance about how to manage risks to people. Staff were also aware potential risks to people could be higher depending on the time of day and how tired the person was. Therefore, staff said they needed to assess risks to people at the time they provided their care, as well as following the care plan, to ensure risks to people were mitigated.

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 all lived in their own properties with access to a call system within the retirement village. People were able to use the provider’s property maintenance service if required and told us they were happy with the service provided. People who received the regulated activity all had a personal emergency evacuation plan, in the event this was required.

People were responsible for ensuring the maintenance and servicing of their equipment within their home. However, the provider also had equipment if required, for example, if a person fell and needed staff to support them using a hoist. The provider ensured the required safety and maintenance checks were completed on this equipment.

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.

Staff were safely recruited before receiving an induction to their role, which included the opportunity to shadow more senior staff. New staff were subject to satisfactory completion of their probation period. Staff were then supported with supervisions, competency assessments and an annual appraisal.

People confirmed there were enough well trained, competent staff to support them at the times they wished. A person’s relative said, “Staff are very well trained, there is a training programme for all the staff and they are strongly encouraged to upgrade their skill set.” Staff completed a range of mandatory and role specific training, they told us they were also encouraged by the provider to undertake further professional qualifications.

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.

Staff completed infection control, hand hygiene and food hygiene training. There was an infection prevention and control lead for the service as required, to ensure compliance with regulations and guidance.

People told us staff wore the appropriate personal protective equipment to provide their personal care, which staff confirmed. We observed staff wore protective aprons and checked foods were in date when preparing a meal for a person. People said they could book a cleaner through the retirement village’s housekeeping service if they wished to have their property cleaned.

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 were happy with the support they received from staff with their medicines and told us they received them on time. This was particularly important for people who were prescribed medicines which had to be administered at specific times. People’s medicines risk assessment and care plan detailed the support they required from staff with their medicines. Staff had access to sufficient information to safely administer medicines people took ‘as required.’

Staff had completed medicines training and had their competence assessed. Staff had access to the provider’s medicines policy and guidance. The provider had weekly, monthly and quarterly processes in place to audit and monitor people’s medicines were being administered safely.